Yellen/ANCs v. Chehalis Oral Argument Transcript

Here.

CSPAN link here.

Background materials here.

SCOTUS Argument in Yellen/ANCs v. Chehalis

CSPAN link here.

Background materials here.

Strict Scrutiny Podcast Featuring Yellen v. Chehalis Preview

Here.

Transcript here.

Background materials here.

Cert Petition in Seneca Nation Citizen’s Treaty-Based Tax Immunity Claim

Here is the petition in Perkins v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue:

Perkins v. Commissioner Cert Petition

Question presented:

This Court is presented with a question of first impression, as to the taxability of income derived from the sale of sand and gravel, mined from treatyprotected land by an enrolled member of the Seneca Nation of Indians (“Seneca Nation”). Upon the granting of certiorari, the Court will examine the language in two federal treaties, promising not to disturb the “free use and enjoyment” of lands by the Seneca Nation and “their Indian friends residing thereon and united with them,” and protecting these lands “from all taxes” for any purpose. Treaty with the Six Nations (“Canandaigua Treaty”), art. III, Nov. 11, 1794, 7 Stat. 45; Treaty with the Senecas (“1842 Treaty”), art. 9th, May 20, 1842, 7 Stat. 590. Congress has explicitly stated the Internal Revenue Code “shall be applied to any taxpayer with due regard to any treaty obligation of the United States which applies to such taxpayer.” 26 U.S.C.A. § 894 (a)(1)(West).

The question presented is whether the United States Court of Appeals and the United States Tax Court have given “due regards” to the treaty obligations of the United States by finding these treaties had no textual support for an exemption from federal income tax applicable to an enrolled Seneca member whose income is derived from the
lands of the Seneca Nation. Perkins v. Comm’r, 970 F.3d 148, 162-67 (2d. Cir. 2020).

Lower court materials here.

UPDATE (5/1/21):

Starna Amicus Brief

Commissioner BIO

Reply

SCOTUS Denies Cert in Yakama v. Yakima County Criminal Jurisdiction Dispute

Here is today’s order list.

Cert stage briefs and links to lower court materials here.

Elizabeth Reese on the Cooley Argument [SCOTUSBlog]

Here.

Federal Court Dismisses Remaining Comanche Claims against US over Chickasaw Casino

Here are the materials in Comanche Nation of Oklahoma v. de la Vega [formerly Zinke, then Bernhardt, and now should be Haaland] (W.D. Okla.):

106-1 Second Amended Complaint

113 Motion to Dismiss

120 Response

123 Reply

124 DCT Order

Prior posts here, here, and here.

United States v. Cooley Oral Argument

Here.

Background materials here.

Elizabeth Reese’s preview of the case “Tribal police drag messy Indian sovereignty cases back to the court.”

Update: Transcript.

Seneca County v. Cayuga Indian Nation Cert Petition

Here:

2021-02-17 Seneca County Petition Final

Lower court materials here.

Question presented:

This Court has twice granted certiorari to decide whether tribal sovereign immunity bars lawsuits concerning rights to property that a tribe acquires on the open market. See Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Lundgren, 138 S.Ct. 1649 (2018); Madison Cty. v. Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y., 562 U.S. 960 (2010) (mem.). Both times, however, subsequent developments prevented the Court from definitively answering the question. This case presents an opportunity to definitively answer that important and recurring question. In the decision below, the Second Circuit doubled down on the holding that this Court granted certiorari to review in Madison County, and again robbed this Court’s decision in City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of N.Y., 544 U.S. 197 (2005), of practical effect by holding that if an Indian tribe purchases land on the open market and refuses to pay property taxes, there is nothing a local jurisdiction can do about it. That decision cannot be reconciled with Sherrill, and it effectively grants tribes a super immunity by rejecting the “uniform authority in support of the view that” the “immovable property” exception would preclude any sovereign’s efforts to invoke sovereign immunity in these circumstances. Upper Skagit, 138 S.Ct. at 1657 (Thomas, J., dissenting).
The question presented is:
Whether tribal sovereign immunity bars local tax authorities from collecting lawfully imposed property taxes by foreclosing on real property that a tribe has acquired on the open market.

SCOTUS Asks for Views of SG in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Gaming Case

Here is today’s order list.

Cert stage briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.