Here are the materials in United States v. Whipple-Wright (D.S.D.):
South Dakota Federal Court Suppresses Non-Mirandized Answer to Tribal Membership Question
Rosebud Sioux Tribe
California Federal Court Orders Arbitration in Dispute in Tribal Sovereign Lending Case
Here are the materials in Huntley v. Rosebud Economic Development Corp. (S.D. Cal.):
8-1 Motion to Compel Arbitration
13 Response to Motion to Compel
14 Response to Motion to Dismiss
South Dakota Federal Court Dismisses Federal Gun Possession Indictment Relying on Rosebud’s D.V. Conviction
Here are the available materials in United States v. Peneaux (D.S.D.):
An excerpt from the order:
Federal law prohibits the possession of a firearm by a person “who has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.” 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9). Defendant Hunter Peneaux pleaded guilty to domestic abuse in Rosebud Sioux Tribal Court on three separate occasions. He was later indicted by a grand jury for violating § 922(g)(9). Peneaux now moves to dismiss the indictment, arguing that his tribal court convictions do not qualify as misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence because they did not have” as an element, the user attempted use of physical force.” 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(33)(A)(ii). Under the sometimes-frustrating analys is required by the Supreme Court, this Court must dismiss Peneaux’s indictment.
Court Grants Summary Judgment in favor of Rosebud and Oglala in NVRA Suit
Order Denying Motion to Dismiss in Rosebud and Oglala National Voter Registration Act Lawsuit
Here is the Order Denying South Dakota’s Motion to Dismiss Rosebud and Oglala’s Complaint that South Dakota is failing to comply with the National Voter Registration Act.
doc.-115-memorandom-and-order-denying-defs-motion-to-dismiss-rst-v-barnett0-2022.05.17-00234861x105fe6Download
Here is the Amended Complaint.
Previous post on this issue here.
Harvard Law Review Case Note on Standing Rock Decision
Dakota Access LLC v. Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Cert Petition [Updated with additional cert stage briefs]
Here:
Questions presented:
- Whether, under NEPA, an agency that carefully considers all criticisms of its environmental analysis must also “resolve” those criticisms to the court’s satisfaction to justify a finding of no significant impact; and
- Whether procedural error under NEPA per se warrants remand with vacatur.
Lower court materials here.
Update:
Update in Standing Rock/Dakota Access Pipeline
Here are the new materials in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (D.D.C.):
Prior post here.
D.C. Circuit Affirms Order that DAPL Easement is Illegal, but Does Not Require Shutdown of Pipeline
Here is the opinion in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers.
An excerpt:
Lake Oahe, created when the United States Army Corps of Engineers flooded thousands of acres of Sioux lands in the Dakotas by constructing the Oahe Dam on the Missouri River, provides several successor tribes of the Great Sioux Nation with water for drinking, industry, and sacred cultural practices. Passing beneath Lake Oahe’s waters, the Dakota Access Pipeline transports crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois. Under the Mineral Leasing Act, 30 U.S.C. § 185, the pipeline could not traverse the federally owned land at the Oahe crossing site without an easement from the Corps. The question presented here is whether the Corps
violated the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321, by issuing that easement without preparing an environmental impact statement despite substantial criticisms from the Tribes and, if so, what should be done about that failure. We agree with the district court that the Corps acted unlawfully, and we affirm the court’s order vacating the easement while the Corps prepares an environmental impact statement. But we reverse the court’s order to the extent it directed that the pipeline be shut down and emptied of oil.
Briefs here.
D.C. Circuit Materials in Standing Rock v. Army Corps
Here are the briefs in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers:
Members of Congress Amicus Brief
States Against DAPL Amicus Brief
States Supporting DAPL Amicus Brief
Oral argument audio here.
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.