Scholars Amicus Brief in Patchak v. Zinke

Here:

16-498 bsac Fed. Cts. and Indian Law Scholars

Background materials here.

Upper Skagit Cert Petition in In Rem Tribal Immunity Matter

Here is the petition in Upper Skagit Indian Tribe v. Lundgren:

Cert Petition

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?

Lower court materials here.

UPDATE:

Cert Opp

Reply

Tribal and Federal Merits Briefs in Patchak v. Zinke

Here:

US Merits Brief

Gun Lake Merits Brief

Other briefs here.

Seattle Human Rights Commission Letter on Culverts Case

Here:

Seattle Human Rights Commission Culvert_OpEd

An excerpt:

The Seattle Human Rights Commission writes in response to the Seattle Times recent editorial “The Supreme Court must clarify culvert ruling,” and seeks to correct inaccuracies regarding tribal treaty rights and the State’s obligation to not impair them. Washington’s tribal nations have lived and fished throughout our State since time immemorial, and their right to do so is protected by treaty. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, in an exhaustive and well researched opinion, recognized that this right requires the removal of culverts that block fish passage. The State’s decision to seek Supreme Court review of that decision reflects revisionist and troubling effort to weaken treaty rights.

Federal Court Declines to Stay Mandate in Effort to Condemn Navajo Lands Saying Utility Loses Even if SCOTUS Reverses

Here are the materials in Public Service Company of New Mexico v. Approximately 15.49 Acres of Land in McKinley County (D.N.M.):

142 Motion to Confirm Stay Order

143 Response

145 Reply

147 DCT Order

Prior posts here.

Alaska v. Ross Cert Stage Materials (ESA Seal Listing)

Here:

Cert Petition

AFN Amicus Brief

Fed Cert Opp

Alaska Reply

Town of Vernon v. United States Cert Stage Materials

Here:

Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Whether a tribe that opted out of the Indian Reorganization Act can have its status under the Act revived under the Indian Land Consolidation Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2202, even though the United States did not hold land in trust for that tribe at the time the tribe sought a land-in-trust acquisition.

2. Whether the land-in-trust provision of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. § 5108, exceeds Congress’ authority under the Indian Commerce Clause, Art. I, § S, cl. 3.

3. Whether § 5108’s standardless delegation of authority to acquire land “for Indians” is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power.

4. Whether the federal government’s control over state land must be categorically exclusive for the Enclave Clause, Art. I, § 8, cl. 17, to prohibit the removal of that land from state jurisdiction.

US Cert Opp Brief

Great Plains Lending v. Consumer Financial Protection Board Cert Petition

Here:

Cert Petition

Question presented:

Whether a generally applicable federal statute, which is silent as to its applicability to Indian Tribes, should nevertheless be presumed to apply to Tribes.

Lower court materials here.

 UPDATE:

Town of Aquinnah v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) Cert Petition

Here:

Town of Aquinnah’s Cert Petition 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts Cert Petition

Question presented:

Whether the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, a statute of general application, impliedly repealed other federal statutes that specifically subject Indian tribes to state restrictions on gaming, a question that has divided the courts of appeals.

Lower court materials here.

UPDATE:

Aquinnah Cert Opp

Reply

French v. Starr Cert Petition (+ Cert Opp)

Here:

Cert Petition

Lower court materials here.

Update:

Cert Opp

Reply