Here is the opinion in United States v. Mackety.
Sixth Circuit Vacates Sentence of Nottawaseppi Huron Band Potawatomi Member in Sex Offense Case
Here is the opinion in United States v. Mackety.
Sixth Circuit
NYTs: Sixth Circuit “Most Dysfunctional Federal Appeals Court in the Nation”
Here is a link to the article. And links to the materials in the underlying complaint here and here (from How Appealing).
An excerpt from the article:
The Belle Meade Country Club in Nashville has about 600 voting members. None of them are women, and none of them are black. But one of them is a federal judge.
In a confidential 10-to-8 decision last month, the Judicial Council of the Sixth Circuit, which hears misconduct complaints about federal judges in Tennessee and three other states, said the judge could keep his membership at Belle Meade.
The ruling opens windows on two odd institutions. One is a fading country club that was once an arbiter of success in Nashville’s social, political and business circles. The other is the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which sits in Cincinnati and is surely the most dysfunctional federal appeals court in the nation.
“The record before this court paints a picture of Belle Meade as an old boys’ club that considers and admits Caucasian male applicants on a different basis than African-American and female applicants,” Judge R. Guy Cole Jr. wrote in a dissent from last month’s ruling. “We federal judges must sometimes make sacrifices for the honor of the office we hold, and the judge’s membership in Belle Meade should have been one of them.”
Sixth Circuit Rejects Challenge to Michigan Gaming Control Act and Detroit Gaming Monopoly
Here is the opinion in Northville Downs v. Governor.
How Appealing: Sixth Circuit Most Reversed Circuit
From How Appealing:
“6th Circuit Takes Lead As Most Reversed Appeals Court”: Today in The Daily Journal of California, Lawrence Hurley has an article that begins, “The San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, often categorized as too liberal and out of sync with the more conservative U.S. Supreme Court, faces some unusual competition this term for its crown as the most reversed circuit.”
Sixth Circuit Oral Argument on Michigan Affirmative Action Ban
From the LSJ:
LANSING — A federal appeals court
is about to consider a lawsuit challenging Michigan’s ban against racial preferences in public university admissions and government hiring.
Civil rights groups and University of Michigan students, faculty and applicants say the 2006 ballot measure approved by voters is unconstitutional.
Critics say the constitutional amendment has created an unfair process where universities give weight to geographical diversity and legacy status but not racial identity.
Supporters say the law reflects the will of the people.
Arguments will be held Tuesday morning at the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati. A district judge dismissed a challenge to the law last year.
Sixth Circuit Affirms Immunity of Tribally-Owned Business Entities
Here is the opinion in Memphis Biofuels, LLC v. Chickasaw Nation Industries, Inc. — Memphis Biofuels v Chickasaw Nation Industries CA6 Opinion
Lower court materials and appellate briefs are here.
The court first concluded that Section 17 corporations do not automatically waive immunity: Continue reading
State’s Brief in Challenge to Michigan Gaming Control Act
Here is the State of Michigan’s Sixth Circuit brief in Northville Downs v. Governor — State of Michigan Appellee Brief
The appellant’s brief is here, as are lower court materials.
Sixth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Oklahoma Ottawa Treaty Claims — Declines to Apply Laches
Here is the Sixth Circuit’s opinion in Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Logan — Ottawa Tribe of Oklahoma v Ohio DNR.
The lower court had made its primary holding that the Ottawa Tribe’s treaty claims were barred by laches, as in Sherrill and Cayuga. But consistent with an amicus brief filed by NCAI and Michigan tribes, the Court declined to apply laches, instead relying upon an interpretation of the relevant treaties.
Update on Challenge to Michigan Gaming Control and Revenue Act
Northville Downs’ opening brief before the Sixth Circuit in its challenge to the constitutionality of the Michigan’s Proposal E, barring additional, non-Indian gaming facilities in Michigan absent a state-wide referendum is here — Northville Downs Appellant Brief
In late February, the Eastern District of Michigan (Cohn, J.) rejected a constitutional challenge to Michigan Const. art. IV, section 41, otherwise known as Proposal E, and the Michigan Gaming Control and Revenue Act. Here are the pleadings in Northville Downs v. Granholm.
northville-response-to-motion-to-dismiss [response begins around page 27, the rest is an amended complaint]
Sixth Circuit Holds KBIC Challenge to State Taxes is Nonjusticiable
Here is yesterday’s Sixth Circuit opinion in Keweenaw Bay Indian Community v. Rising. The briefs are here. A few excerpts, the first detailing the history of the dispute dating back to 1977, and including the State of Michigan’s use of federal funds supposed to go to KBIC to pay what it considers to be back taxes, very, very dirty pool in my opinion, though KBIC could always sign up with the tax agreement if it chose:
In 1977, Michigan and the Community entered into a comprehensive tax agreement governing payment and collection of sales and use taxes for transactions involving the Community or its members. In 1994, the parties began renegotiating this agreement, but failed to reach accord. In 1997, Michigan terminated its tax agreements with the twelve federally recognized tribes in the State, as part of an effort to achieve uniformity in its agreements with the tribes. Although the State has reached agreement with most of the Michigan tribes, it has failed to reach agreement with the Community. In the absence of any such agreement, Michigan has apparently adopted a policy of taxing transactions involving the Community or its members, while permitting them to apply to the Treasury for an exemption or refund on a case-by-case basis. The State claims that the Community has flouted this policy and refused to pay many of its taxes. Not surprisingly, the parties have repeatedly disputed the amount of taxes the Community owes to the State, and each has withheld funds that the other party claims it is owed. Most notably for our purposes, in 2005 the State withheld $ 34,166.31 in federal funds owed to the Community, which the State offset from the back taxes that it maintained the Community owed.
And here the court addresses the justiciability issue:
You must be logged in to post a comment.