Here.
That used to be my ferry!
Suquamish Tribe
Federal Dismisses FTCA Claims against US in Shooting of Tribal Member by Tribal Police
Here are the materials so far in Black v. United States (W.D. Wash.):
23 Port Gamble S’Klallam Response
31 DCT Order Dismissing Complaint
Claims against Suquamish and Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribes and officers remain.
Colville Enacts Same-Sex Marriage Recognition Statute
Here (h/t here). They join Coquille, Suquamish, Little Traverse, Pokagon, and Santa Ysabel. For other tribes interested, see the toolkit Ann Tweedy posted a while back.
An important point:
Practically speaking, Finley said, it will mean that gay partners can have the same rights as a married couple of different sexes. One change already enacted allows anyone who works for the tribe to add a spouse of the same sex to their insurance and benefits.
He said the tribe will now begin modifying its other codes, plans and policies to make sure they agree with the newly passed amendment.
Federal Court Issues Decision in Challenge to Suquamish Usual and Accustomed Fishing Areas
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington subproceeding 05-4 (W.D. Wash.):
193 Swinomish Motion for Partial Summary J
Subp 05-4 Dkt 242 Order Suquamish-1
Materials on subproceeding 05-3 are here.
WaPo on Same Sex Marriage in Indian Country
Here. H/T How Appealing.
Ninth Circuit Denies Rehearing/En Banc Review of Maxwell v. County of San Diego — Tribal Officials Not Immune under Section 1983
Here is the order:
Maxwell v. County of San Diego (9th 2013)
An excerpt:
The panel has voted to deny the petition for rehearing in case number 10-56671; Judges Clifton and Ikuta vote to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Farris so recommends. Judges Farris and Clifton vote to deny the petition for rehearing in case number 10-56706; Judge Clifton votes to deny the petition for rehearing en banc, and Judge Farris so recommends. Judge Ikuta votes to grant the petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc. The full court has been advised of the petitions for rehearing en banc and no judge has requested a vote on whether to rehear the matters en banc. Fed. R. App. P. 35. The petitions for panel rehearing and the petitions for rehearing en banc are DENIED.
Earlier materials are here: panel opinion materials and en banc petition.
Suquamish Tribe Loses Preliminary Injunction in Bangor Construction
“The Tribe filed a lawsuit in Washington Western District Court Aug. 27 against the U.S. Navy, Army Corps of Engineers and the National Marine Fisheries Service, stating the Navy did not acknowledge Suquamish’s fishing rights in the Hood Canal when it was left out of the project’s mitigation agreements.
According to a 1985 court case, Suquamish has secondary fishing rights in the canal, and can fish there upon invitation by the Skokomish Tribe.”
Link to North Kitsap Herald article:
http://www.northkitsapherald.com/news/189436801.html
U.S. District Court Western District of Washington at Tacoma, Order Denying Preliminary Injunction:
Pending Ninth Circuit En Banc Petition Materials in Maxwell v. County of San Diego
You’ll recall the panel opinion here found that tribal employees have no official immunity for official actions.
Here are the en banc petition materials:
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Amicus Brief
Maxwell Response to En Banc Petition
Maxwell Supplemental Authorities Letter
The petition is still pending, but perhaps the Miller v. Wright amendment is evidence that the Ninth Circuit could take this case for en banc review.
Washington State’s Governor Signs Gay Marriage Into Law
Here.
Following Coquille and Suquamish’s lead….
Washington SCT Decides Five Corners Family Farmers v. State — Groundwater Allocation Case
Here is the majority and here is the dissent.
Here is the tribal amicus brief.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.