treaty rights – Page 15

NYTs: New York Complains about Tribal Smokeshops

October 2, 2008October 2, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the NYTs:

He emerged from the No. 2 subway at 125th Street wearing a bright orange shirt and aviator sunglasses, with a small backpack concealing his stock in trade — tax-free Newport cigarettes.

Like a Yankee Stadium hawker, but in voice closer to a stage whisper, he kept repeating his pitch: “Newports. Loosies. Shorts. Longs.”

His name is Paco, but on the streets of Harlem he is known simply as a “$5 man,” the nickname for a highly visible network of peddlers who sell bootleg cigarettes. His illegal traffic in Newports — $5 a pack or a single “loosie” cigarette for 50 cents — can bring him $100 or more a day.

Paco will not reveal his last name or the source of his Newports, the menthol brand widely popular in urban communities. But legal authorities say the trail of the $5 men leads to American Indian reservations in New York State, a path they contend is smoothed by the tacit cooperation of some cigarette makers and distributors.

Ottawa Tribe v. Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources — Sixth Circuit Materials

September 10, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Please see our previous post on this case here (it links to the briefs and other materials in the lower court).

Here is the Ottawa Tribe’s opening brief: appellant-brief

And here is the amicus brief signed by the National Congress of American Indians and several Michigan tribes on the laches question: brief-amici-curiae

Klamath Tribe v. Pacificorp Cert Petition

June 6, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

This was filed May 28. The docket number is 07-1492. Our previous post is here.

Klamath Cert Petition

Case to Watch — Stockbridge Munsee Reservation Diminishment Case

May 1, 2008January 21, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Years ago, Wisconsin sued the Stockbridge-Munsee Community over the site of its Class III gaming operation, alleging that the land upon which the casino was located was outside the reservation boundaries, or that the reservation had been disestablished. The case is in the Seventh Circuit now and briefing is underway:

1999-dct-opinion-wisconsin-v-stockbridge-munsee

2004-dct-opinion-wisconsin-v-stockbridge-munsee

stockbridge-munsee-appellant-brief

wisconsin-appellee-brief

stockbridge-munsee-reply-brief

Call for Papers — Living Treaties Anishinaabe Summit

April 21, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

The presence of the US/Canada Border is a fact of life for Aboriginal People. It is also a simple fact of life that Indigenous people along the border have established their relationship with both US and Canadian governments through Treaty, and those Treaties affect people along the border in profound ways.

As “treaty rights” are continually challenged in the courts, the courts are given opportunities to continually “re-interpret” these treaties. Thus it is important to explore these treaties and related issues in some depth. To that end, The Anishinaabeg Joint Commission (Batchewana First Nation, Bay Mills Indian Community, Garden River First Nation, and the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians), in cooperation with the Center for the Study of Indigenous Border Issues, is issuing a Call For Papers for the Living Treaties Anishinaabeg Summit. The gathering will be held August 13 – 15, 2008, at the Sault Tribe Conference and Convention Center in Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan.

The primary objective of this gathering is to bring together Tribal Elders, Traditional Knowledge Keepers, Tribal historians, college and university faculty and students, land claims researchers, Government officials (US, Canadian, Tribal), and Indigenous Community members so that we can all benefit from a thorough discussion and understanding of the role that Treaties play in the lives of Native Peoples along the US/Canada border.

Continue reading →

U.S. v. Oregon — Denial of Yakama Treaty Rights

April 16, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Yakama’s quest for treaty rights in United States v. Oregon suffered another setback in federal district court. Here are the materials:

yakama-motion-for-partial-summary-judgment

colville-opposition

yakama-reply

dct-order-yakama-v-colville

Two Makah Whalers Convicted in Federal Court

April 8, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From Indianz:

A federal magistrate convicted two members of the Makah Nation of Washington for hunting a gray whale without federal approval.

Wayne Johnson and Andy Noel were convicted of conspiracy to violate the Marine Mammal Protection Act and unlawfully taking a marine mammal. They waived the right to a jury trial but plan to take their case to the >9th Circuit Court of Appeals. Johnson and Noel face up to one year in prison Three other tribal members who participated in the hunt pleaded guilty in exchange for no prison time.

Continue reading →

Dispute over Access to Straits of Mackinac

April 1, 2008April 1, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From the Petoskey News-Review:

In a pending lawsuit, the owners of a Wawatam Township lot are seeking ownership of an adjacent strip of property that the public often uses to access the Straits of Mackinac.

The legal efforts have raised concerns from county and township officials about the potential loss of public water access.

“What we don’t want to do is, we don’t want it to fall into the hands of a private owner,” said Wawatam supervisor Roger Moore. “We want to keep it so it would be accessible to the public like it always has.”

Adjoining landowner Ralph Reisinger said he’s looking for a way to control illegal activities by visitors rather than putting the spot off limits. He noted that some of the people who’ve visited the area at the end of the road have engaged in activities such as littering and building unauthorized campfires on his lot and setting off illegal fireworks.

Continue reading →

Freedmen Claim Against United States Dismissed (Fed. Cl.)

February 25, 2008March 7, 2008Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The case is Harvest Institute Freedmen Federation v. United States. The court dismissed the claim under FRCP 12(b)(1) — failure to state a claim — but not on the government’s statute of limitations claim. Here are the materials:

1866 Freedmen Agreement

US Motion to Dismiss

Continue reading →