Supreme Court – Page 77

The Supreme Court has been instrumental in defining legal rights and obligations pertaining to Indian lands since its first path-making decision in the field in Johnson v. McIntosh in 1823. But the groundwork for the Court’s contemplation of such cases predates Supreme Court jurisprudence, and it in fact predates the formation of the Court and the United States itself.

When Europeans first made contact with this continent, they encountered hundreds of indigenous, sovereign nations representing enormous diversity in terms of language, culture, religion, and governance. For those indigenous groups — as is a common attribute of indignity of similarly situated indigenous groups around the world — this land was and is holy land. Indigenous creation stories root Indian people in this continent — Turtle Island to many — as the focal point of life, creation, religion, culture, and language. In the settlement of the country, the colonial powers initially — and the United States subsequently — treated with Indian nations to negotiate the transfer of lands from Indians to Europeans, often in exchange for peace or protection.

Prof. Riley had previously presented this paper to the Supreme Court historical society, which was televised on C-SPAN.

Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians Cert Petition

June 17, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Dollar General Cert Petition

Questions presented:

Whether Indian tribal courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate civil tort claims against nonmembers, including as a means of regulating the conduct of nonmembers who enter into consensual relationships with a tribe or its members?

Lower court materials here.

The court also voted 9-5 to deny the en banc petition: CA5 Order Denying Dolgencorp En Banc Petition

En banc petition materials here.

Panel materials here.

Lower court decision and materials here.

Sault Tribe Renews Motion to Dismiss Michigan’s Lansing Casino Suit in Federal District Court

June 11, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

49 Renewed Motion to Dismiss

This, in light of the State’s withdraw of its cert petition.

Supreme Court Cert Petition in FTCA/Bivens Claims against Federal & Tribal Officers

June 11, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the petition in Dupris v. Proctor:

Dupris Cert Petition

Questions presented:

1. Whether this Court should resolve a split among the circuit courts of appeal, created by the Ninth Circuit panel decision in this matter, as to whether federal agents have “discretion” to arrest an individual without probable cause, for purposes of sovereign immunity under the “discretionary function” doctrine of the Federal Tort Claims Act?

2. Whether this Court should resolve a split among the circuit courts of appeal as to whether a law enforcement officer’s pre-arrest consultation with a prosecutor, standing alone, entitles the officer to qualified immunity?

3. Given the federal agents’ testimony that there were not any “positive identifications” of Petitioners, contradictory to what the agents told the tribal prosecutor, whether this Court should remand pursuant to this Court’s recent holding in Tolan v. Cotton, — U.S. –, 134 S.Ct. 1861 (2014), to ensure that the Court of Appeals properly viewed all evidence in the light most favorable to the Petitioners?

Lower court materials here.