Here:
Question presented:
Can Congress’s delegation to the Department of the Interior of withdrawal authority over large tracts of land survive without the legislative veto right that Congress included as a check on the exercise of that authority?
Lower court materials here.
Update:
Here:
Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
Questions presented:
1. Whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction over the appeal filed by a nonparty when the nonparty did not participate in any capacity in the district court proceedings.
2. Whether the Tenth Circuit improperly invoked the Indian canon of construction to deprive surface-estate owners who are members or successors-in-interest to Indian tribe members of important property rights by overriding clear regulatory language for the express purpose of favoring the economic interests of an Indian tribe without examining congressional intent.
Lower court materials here.
UPDATES:
Opinion here.
THOMAS, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which BREYER, ALITO, and KAGAN, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a concurring opinion. GINSBURG, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SOTOMAYOR, J., joined. SOTOMAYOR, J., filed an
opinion concurring in the judgment. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which KENNEDY and GORSUCH, JJ., joined.***
Petitioner, David Patchak, sued the Secretary of the
Interior for taking land into trust on behalf of an Indian
Tribe. While his suit was pending in the District Court,
Congress enacted the Gun Lake Trust Land Reaffirmation
Act (Gun Lake Act or Act), Pub. L. 113–179, 128 Stat.
1913, which provides that suits relating to the land “shall
not be filed or maintained in a Federal court and shall be
promptly dismissed.” Patchak contends that, in enacting
this statute, Congress impermissibly infringed the judicial
power that Article III of the Constitution vests exclusively
in the Judicial Branch. Because we disagree, we affirm
the judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit.
Previous posts here.
Here:
Question presented:
Whether Congress clearly intended in 1905 to di- minish the Wind River Reservation in Wyoming, home to the Eastern Shoshone Tribe.
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
Here is today’s order list. The Court denied cert in Renteria v. Superior Court & Norton v. Ute Indian Tribe.
As a reminder, this is the cert petition regarding the very long Utah Supreme Court decision which held there is a federal reasonableness standard for determining whether an unwed father is a parent under ICWA. That decision is here.
Another reminder–there are generally no cert stage amicus briefs filed in opposition to a cert petition. And a cert petition is just asking the Supreme Court to take the case. It doesn’t mean the Court has taken the case.
R.K.B. NCFA Amicus ISO Cert Final
R.K.B. v. E.T. FINAL AMICUS BRIEF AAAA
Here:
Question presented:
Whether the 1866 territorial boundaries of the Creek Nation within the former Indian Territory of eastern Oklahoma constitute an “Indian reservation” today under 18 U.S.C. § 1151(a).
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
Environmental Federation Of Oklahoma Inc Amicus Brief
Question presented:
Does a court’s exercise of in rem jurisdiction overcome the jurisdictional bar of tribal sovereign immunity when the tribe has not waived immunity and Congress has not unequivocally abrogated it?
Here are the merit stage briefs:
States Amicus Brief in Support of Neither Party
Cert stage briefs:
Lower court materials:
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.