Here is the brief in Sackett v. EPA:
Supreme Court
SCOTUS Rules in Favor of Tribal Gaming in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas
Gila River Indian Community Response to PLF Amicus Brief in Brackeen
We rarely post press releases, but this exception is an important one. Here is the Gila River press release explaining more about the C.J. Jr. case that the Pacific Legal Foundation is trying to use to undermine ICWA.
GRIC Statement on PLF Brief 06-07-22[3]
PLF’s brief falsely portrays ICWA as causing delays in C.J., Jr.’s and other cases. The delays in C.J., Jr.’s case were caused not by ICWA, but the failure of the Ohio courts and child welfare agencies to timely notify the Community of the case and an unprecedented level of obstruction and bias against the Community from the court–appointed guardian ad litem (who filed two appeals of the juvenile court’s decisions and moved to delay resolution of the appeals). The Community successfully sought removal of the guardian for misconduct and bias, but only after lengthy delays. PLF is fully aware of this, as one of the attorneys who signed their amicus brief in Brackeen v. Haaland represented the guardian ad litem who was removed from the case.
SCOTUS Affirms in Denezpi v. United States
States’ Cert Petition in Navajo Nation Water Rights Case
Here is the petition in Arizona v. Navajo Nation:
Questions presented:
I. Does the Ninth Circuit Opinion, allowing the Nation to proceed with a claim to enjoin the Secretary to develop a plan to meet the Nation’s water needs and *ii manage the mainstream of the LBCR so as not to interfere with that plan, infringe upon this Court’s retained and exclusive jurisdiction over the allocation of water from the LBCR mainstream in Arizona v. California?
II. Can the Nation state a cognizable claim for breach of trust consistent with this Court’s holding in Jicarilla based solely on unquantified implied rights to water under the Winters Doctrine?
Lower court materials here.
Top Side Briefing in Haaland v. Brackeen
This case is a little complicated regarding the name and who is filing when. The Court is keeping all of the documents under case number 21-376, which is Haaland v. Brackeen. But in its order granting cert, the Court stated that Texas and the foster families would file first, or be “top side” in the briefing schedule. The federal government and the tribes will file on August 5, and the subsequent amicus briefs on August 12.
If you are thinking about a pro-ICWA amicus brief and have not yet talked to Dan Lewerenz (lewerenz@narf.org) at NARF now is the time to reach out. If you are a tribe looking to sign on to the tribal amicus brief, please reach out to Erin Dougherty Lynch (dougherty@narf.org), also at NARF.
Top Side Principle Briefs
Brackeen_Haaland v. Brackeen — Opening Brief
Texas_Haaland v. Brackeen – Opening Br. for Texas
Top Side Amicus Briefs
CatoGoldwaterFosterParents_Amicus Brief
CJJr_PLF Amicus Brief – BRACKEEN – 2022.06.01 – FINAL
ProjectforFairRep_21-376 -377 -378 -380 ICWA Amicus Brief
NewCivilLiberties_21-378 Amicus NCLA Supp. Pet.
CERA_CERF Amicus Brief in Support of No Party -Final-6-2-22
ChristianICWA_21-376 -377 -378 and -380 Brief
AAAA_21-376 Amicus AAAA and NCFA
Notable additions to the anti-ICWA amicus briefs include Oklahoma and parties of ICWA cases past.
Oklahoma’s “Indian Status” Cert Petition
Adams v. Dodge Cert Petition
Here:
Questions presented:
1. Whether federal plaintiffs seeking to challenge their non-federal prosecution on the basis of bad faith face a heightened pleading standard.
2. Whether actions taken by the clerk of a non-federal court to impede review of a habeas petition obviate the petitioner’s need to further exhaust remedies in that court.
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.