Yale Native Study Group Overview of Dollar General v. Mississippi Choctaw Case

Here, “YGSNA Members Prepare Amicus Briefs for the U.S. Supreme Court, DOLLAR GENERAL CORP. vs. MISSISSIPPI BAND OF CHOCTAW INDIANS.” An excerpt:Shame on Dollar General

In 2000, the Dollar General Corporation entered into a series of agreements with the Mississippi Band Choctaw Indians to open a Dollar General store on the Tribe’s lands in Mississippi.  Numerous national chains and corporations maintain commercial establishments on tribal lands, leasing lands, facilities, and related commercial venues for their enterprises.  Such leases and agreements form contracts that are executed by both tribal and corporate attorneys.

Dollar General agreed not only to lease lands from the Tribe for its retail business but also to enter into the Tribe’s Youth Opportunity Program, which places tribal youth in working environments.  In Summer 2003, a 13-year-old entered this program and was placed within the Dollar General store under the supervision of a store manager who, the minor and his parents allege, sexually assaulted him.  Since the United States Supreme Court, in 1978, declared that Tribal Governments may no longer exercise their inherent criminal jurisdiction over Indians who commit crimes on tribal lands, the minor, his family, and the Tribe looked to the local U.S. Attorney’s Office for prosecution. The United States declined to proceed with a criminal complaint, and the minor and his parents then sued Dollar General and its employee in tribal court, seeking damages relating to the child’s injuries. The District Court and Mississippi Band of Choctaw Supreme Court both sided with the minor.

Menominee Indian Tribe v. United States Materials

Here are the briefs and other materials:

Merits Briefs

Menominee Tribe Brief

US Brief

Amicus Briefs

NCAI Amicus Brief

Cert Stage Materials

Menominee Indian Tribe Cert Petition

US cert response brief

Lower Court Materials

–D.C. Circuit 

opinion

Menominee Opening Brief 2013

IHS Brief

Menominee Reply Brief

–DCT

DCT Order Dismissing Menominee Claims

IHS Motion to Dismiss

Menominee Motion for Summary J

–D.C. Circuit (2010)

Opinion

Respondents Brief in Menominee Indian Tribe v. United States

Here:

US Brief

 

Complete Listing of Amicus Briefs Supporting Respondent in Dollar General v. Mississippi Choctaw

Here:

amicus_merits_us

ACLU Amicus Brief 

13-1496bsacPuyallupTribeOfIndians

13-1496 Amici Brief States

13-1496 bsac Historians and Legal Scholars

13-1496bsacNationalCongressOfAmericanIndiansEtAl

13-1496bsacNationalIndigenousWomensResourceCenter

13-1496 bsac Cherokee Nation et al

These briefs are also available at our regular page of background materials on the case, along with all the other briefs so far.

Additional Amicus Briefs in Dollar General Supporting Mississippi Choctaw

Here:

National Indigenous Women’s Resource Center Brief

Amicus Brief from the States of Mississippi, Washington, Oregon, North Dakota, New Mexico and Colorado

Initial Amicus Briefs posted here.

We’re posting all materials here.

Initial Amicus Briefs in Dollar General Supporting Mississippi Choctaw

Here:

ACLU Amicus Brief 

13-1496bsacPuyallupTribeOfIndians

We’re posting all materials here.

SCOTUS Schedules Oral Argument in Menominee (Dec. 1) and Dollar General (Dec. 7)

Here.

Cert Opposition Brief in Jensen v. EXC

Here:

EXC Cert Opp

Cert petition is here.

United States v. Bryant Cert Petition — Federal Habitual Offender Statute and Uncounseled Tribal Court Convictions

Here is the petition:

Cert Petition

Question presented:

Section 117(a) of Title 18, United States Code, makes it a federal crime for any person to “commit[] a domestic assault within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States or Indian country” if the person “has a final conviction on at least 2 separate prior occasions in Federal, State, or Indian tribal court proceedings for” enumerated domestic-violence offenses. 18 U.S.C. 117(a).

The question presented is whether reliance on valid uncounseled tribal-court misdemeanor convictions to prove Section 117(a)’s predicate-offense element violates the Constitution.

Lower court materials here (en banc) and here (panel).

SCOTUS Order from Long Conference

Here.

The Supreme Court denied cert in Oklahoma v. Hobia, Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk, Sac and Fox Nation v. Borough of Jim Thorpe, and Torres v. Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians.

The Court took no action on the Jensen v. EXC petition, perhaps because the Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians matter is pending and involves similar issues (tribal court jurisdiction over nonmembers).