Here are the materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash., subproceeding 14-01):
37 Suquamish Motion for Summary J
38 Upper Skagit Motion for Summary J
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community
The Stranger on the Swinomish Tribe’s Fight against BNSF’s Railroad
Here is “How One Tribe Could Slow the Rate of “Bomb Trains” Through Seattle.”An excerpt:
The Swinomish Indian Tribal Community couldn’t have known that more than a century later, crude-oil trains would be rattling along that very route—and across reservation land—carrying with them a well-established risk of derailing and exploding. In fact, the only way today’s Swinomish people knew that trains full of crude oil were passing through their land was from media reports in 2012. They’re not alone. As it stands, railroads still don’t have to disclose crude-by-rail routes.
Seattle Weekly: Fish vs. Farms on the Skagit Delta
Here.
An excerpt:
The Skagit delta farming system’s intricate rotation of some 80 vegetable and seed crops has been 150 years in the making. Dikes to keep the low-lying farmland dry and tide gates to prevent saltwater incursion into croplands are valuable to farmers, but not so much to Natives trying to revive salmon runs on the third largest American river on the contiguous West Coast.
The Swinomish Tribe’s priority is fish, not farms. And a century and a half of treaty law has put in their hands considerable power to press their case. In 1855, territorial Governor Isaac Stevens negotiated with western Washington tribes, trying to coax them into giving up millions of acres of land and retreat to reservations with prescribed boundaries. The Treaty of Point Elliott, signed by tribal leaders at a place later known as Mukilteo, included a guarantee of perpetual fishing rights. The treaty included this language: “The right of taking fish, at all usual and accustomed grounds and stations, is further secured to said Indians in common with all other citizens of the Territory, and of erecting temporary houses for the purpose of curing them, together with the privileges of hunting, gathering roots and berries, and pasturing their horses on open and unclaimed lands.”
Swinomish-Licensed Smokes Sellers Prevail (In Part) in the Ninth Circuit on CCTA Charges
Here are the materials in United States v. Wilbur:
CA9 Opinion (per Judge W. Fletcher, with partial dissent by Judge Rawlinson)
An excerpt:
For the reasons that follow, we agree with the Wilburs that during the period from 2003 to 2005, when they were licensed to sell tobacco by the Swinomish Tribe, there were no “applicable State or local cigarette taxes” under the CCTA. We also agree with the Wilburs that the five-year statute of limitations for CCTA violations bars any charges based on activity from 1999 to 2003. We conclude, however, that after their tribal tobacco license expired in 2005, the Wilburs’ activities ceased to be covered by the Swinomish cigarette tax contract (“CTC”), and that the state’s retrocession therefore ceased to apply. The unstamped cigarettes the Wilburs transported and sold during this period were thus “contraband” under the CCTA. We reject the Wilburs’ due process and treaty arguments.
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.
Water Pollution Regulations Ignore Native Community Fish Consumption
Huffington Post article is here. An excerpt:
For many communities, the consequences also go beyond just health concerns.
“Traditional families are still very active in the smokehouse. They are still fishing for their primary source of living,” says Jamie Donatuto, an environmental specialist for the Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, in La Conner, Wash. “Fish are not just a source of nutrients, they have cultural and spiritual meaning for these people.”
Donatuto has been working with the Swinomish tribe for more than a decade on the issue. She recently conducted a survey and found that if tribal members had access to as much safe seafood as they wanted, they would consume more than 100 times the state’s estimate.
“In the Pacific Northwest, fish consumption is a way of life. It’s an important cultural hallmark of tribal nations that live here,” adds Elaine Faustman, a professor of environmental and occupational health studies at the University of Washington.
In fact, as she points out, it’s not uncommon to find kids “teething on salmon jerky.”
Northwest Indian Canoe Journeys in NYTs
Here is a link to the article.
Michael Hanson for The New York Times
Canoes from tribes throughout the coastal Northwest converged on the Swinomish reservation, the host for this year’s gathering.
Galanda on the Oak Harbor Fiasco
Here:
Ignoring SHPO’s warning of Indian remains does not an inadvertent discovery make.
Oak Harbor claims that its disturbance of Coast Salish ancestral remains was “not intentional.”In other words, the city claims they inadvertently unearthed the Ancestors.
RCW 27.44.050 subjects Oak Harbor and its contractors to civil liability. That is because the city knew or should have known tribal ancestral remains would be uncovered through excavation, especially due to SHPO’s warning. Having ignored that warning, Oak Harbor’s acts were neither accidental nor inadvertent per RCW 27.44.050.
Oak Harbor and its contractors can now be subject to class action litigation for a potentially staggering amount of imputed and punitive damages under RCW 27.44.050, given Judge Robert Lasnik’s decision in Lummi Nation v. Golder. The imputed/actual damages calculus alone could go like this:
Number of defendants X Number of remains X $500 or actual damages, whichever is greater X Thousands of Coast Salish Indians with ancestral ties to the Oak Harbor Ancestors
Hopefully the threat of a class action lawsuit for millions of dollars (nothwithstanding the Supremes’ Wal-Mart decision) will cause Oak Harbor to remedy the situation. That said, the harm already inflicted upon Coast Salish People is irreparable.
Ninth Circuit Dismisses Appeal of U.S. v. Washington Subproceeding (Lower Elwah v. Lummi)
Here is the unpublished opinion. The underlying dispute apparently is the usual and accustomed fishing area of the Lummi Indian Tribe.
Here are the materials:
Suquamish Tribe Files Cert Petition in U.S. v. Washington Dispute
Here is the petition in Suquamish Tribe v. Upper Skagit Tribe: Suquamish Cert Petition.
Here is the question presented:
Whether a court implementing an unambiguous court order is bound to apply that order according to its plain terms, or whether the court should instead determine whether the judge who initially issued the order “intended something other than its apparent meaning,” as the Ninth Circuit held in this case.
Lower court materials here.
Turtle Talk 