Here:
South Dakota Response to Yankton v Army Corps Cert Petition
This is the petition that the OSG recommended be held in abeyance pending the Court’s decision on whether to grant cert in the Hein/Daugaard/South Dakota/etc. v. Yankton cases.
Supreme Court
US Files Invitation Brief Opposing Cert in Brown v. Rincon Band (IGRA Revenue Sharing Case)
Here is the brief:
Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida Cert Petition
Here:
Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y. v. County of Oneida
Questions presented:
1. Whether the court of appeals contravened this Court’s decisions in Oneida Indian Nation of New York v. County of Oneida, 470 U.S. 226 (1985), and City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation, 544 U.S. 197 (2005), by ruling that “equitable considerations” rendered petitioners’ claims for money damages for the dispossession of their tribal lands in violation of federal law void ab initio.
2. Whether the court of appeals impermissibly encroached on the legislative power of Congress by relying on “equitable considerations” to bar petitioners’ claims as untimely, even though they were brought within the statute of limitations fixed by Congress for the precise tribal land claims at issue.
United States v. New York: Government Cert Petition in Oneida Indian Nation Land Claims
Here is the petition:
Here is the question presented:
The Trade and Intercourse Act of 1793 (also known as the Nonintercourse Act) stated in relevant part that “no purchase or grant of lands, or of any title or claim thereto, from any Indians or nation or tribe of Indians, within the bounds of the United States, shall be of any validity in law or equity, unless the same be made by a treaty or convention entered into pursuant to the constitution.” Ch. 19, § 8, 1 Stat. 330. The question presented is as follows:
Whether the United States may be barred from enforcing the Nonintercourse Act against a State that repeatedly purchased and resold (at a substantial profit) Indian lands in violation of the Act between 1795 and 1846, based on the passage of time and the transfer of the unlawfully obtained Indian lands into the hands of third parties, when the United States seeks monetary relief only against the State.
Supreme Court Denies Cert in Doe v. Kamehameha Schools (Identity of Plaintiffs)
Reed v. Gutierrez Cert Petition
Here:
Reed v Gutierrez Cert Petition
Lower court materials here.
Questions presented:
I. Should the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity be abrogated?
II. Even if the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity should not be abrogated, should it bar claims against Indian tribes or their employees for their off-reservation torts?
Salt River Project v. Arizona Cert Petition
Here:
Salt River Project v. Arizona Cert Petition
Question presented:
Where the United States has, prior to statehood and pursuant to the 1902 Reclamation Act, undertaken to dam and divert substantially the entire annual flows of a river to *ii provide water for federal Reclamation purposes, must a court applying the federal test of “navigability” for determining a new state’s “equal footing” title take into consideration the impacts of those federal actions on the condition of the river at statehood?
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.