Order list here.
Cert petition here. Cert opp briefs here.
Lower court materials here.
Supreme Court
No Bay Mills This Week
The next SCOTUS opinion release day is the 27th.
Michigan Files Cert Petition against Sault Tribe in Lansing Casino Controversy
Here are the petition materials in Michigan v. Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians:
Lower court materials here.
IPR: Fletcher Waits for Bay Mills
Here.
Nothing that you didn’t already know from Kate’s post Tuesday.
An excerpt:
He says the result could be that tribes think twice about investing money off the reservation.
“You can’t put it in your mattress,” he says. “But perhaps into overseas banks or something to that effect.”
Fletcher says it’s just one possible outcome. The court could also write a more limited decision. Fletcher says the least-likely outcome would be for the court to rule in favor of the Bay Mills Indian Community, which argues it is immune from lawsuit in this instance.
No Bay Mills Decision This Week
Three opinions came down today, none of which were the Bay Mills decision. We did get Justice Ginsberg’s opinion (EPA v. EME Homer City) from the December sitting, however. The other two opinions were from the February sitting and both authored by Justice Sotomayor. The previous discussion about what this may or may not mean is here.
There are no more opinion release days scheduled for this week.
Ugh! No Bay Mills Decision Again This Week
No news again. Not sure what that means, but likely it means the Court is fractured. But then again, they usually are so that conclusion isn’t helpful.
SCOTUSblog data tells us that Justices Ginsburg and Kagan have not yet written for the December sitting, which is when the Court heard the Bay Mills argument. Usually, to balance workload, each Justice is assigned one opinion per sitting. But the Court heard 11 arguments in December, so at least two Justices will have two assignments. Justice Scalia, we know after today, has written twice for December, so we can say with some limited certainty that he will not be the author of the majority opinion in Bay Mills. In other words, it could be anyone.
I’m hoping for Justice Kagan (see my commentary on the argument). Her questions at oral argument suggested a narrow, statute-based view of the matter, though I am doubtful she would find in favor of the tribe. Justice Ginsburg dissented in Kiowa, and her opinion would likely go against the tribe in this one, too. The question there is how far she would go.
But it’s very possible neither Kagan nor Ginsburg write, which means that anyone could.
Cert Opposition Briefs in Village of Hobart v. Wisconsin Oneida
Please Read Justice Sotomayor’s Dissent in Schuette v. BAMN
Here.
An excerpt:
The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to speak openly and candidly on the subject of race, and to apply the Constitution with eyes open to the unfortunate effects of centuries of racial discrimination.
Student Commentary on Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community
Here, in the Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar. Titled A Tradition of Sovereignty: Examining Tribal Sovereign Immunity in Bay Mills Indian Community v. Michigan, written by Meredith L. Jewitt.
SCOTUSBlog Petition of the Day: Native Wholesale Supply v. Idaho
Here.
From SCOTUSblog:
13-838Issue: (1) Whether under circumstances in which a state is admittedly precluded from regulating an Indian it is also precluded from regulating a corporation wholly owned by an Indian and organized under the laws of a federally recognized tribe; (2) whether, under a state law that purports to give the attorney general power to “approve” all cigarettes before they may be imported into Idaho, the State of Idaho can prohibit an Indian-owned business on the Coeur d’Alene reservation from importing into that reservation cigarettes that are sold “FOB Seneca Nation” by a company wholly owned by a member of the Seneca Nation and licensed by the Seneca Nation to carry on such trade; (3) whether the State of Idaho’s cigarette-sale statutes are preempted to the extent that they are enforced in a manner that prohibits Native Wholesale Supply Company (“NWS”) from trading with Warpath Inc. (“Warpath”); and (4) whether the State of Idaho can constitutionally exercise personal jurisdiction over NWS, an Indian-chartered entity located on Seneca Nation of Indians Land, situated within the geographic boundaries of the State of New York, where NWS sells the tobacco products “FOB Seneca Nation” to Warpath, and the products are then transported to Warpath’s place of business on the Coeur d’Alene reservation.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.