Here.
Michigan Tribes Oppose Net Pen Aquaculture
Here.
treaty rights
Yakama Nation Largely Prevails in CERCLA Suit with US
Here are the materials in Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. United States of America (D. Or.):
Sault Tribe Treaty Rights Litigation RFP
The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (Michigan) seeks an attorney of stature and notable experience to serve as lead counsel for the negotiation, or litigation, of a resource allocation agreement for court affirmed treaty rights, along with possible litigation regarding exterior boundaries of the ceded territory. Preference will be given to those submissions showing extensive and demonstrable experience in treaty rights litigation. To receive an RFP packet contact Aaron Schlehuber at lawaaron@saulttribe.net..
Elizabeth Kronk Warner on Enforcing Tribal Treaty Provisions to Protect Climate Change Threatened Resources
Elizabeth Kronk Warner has posted “Everything Old is New Again: Enforcing Tribal Treaty Provisions to Protect Climate Change Threatened Resources” on SSRN.
Federal Court Dismisses Claim against Utah Police for Shooting Indian Man
Here are the materials in Jones v. United States (Fed. Cl.):
Summary Judgment Briefs in Turunen v. Michigan DNR — Treaty Right to Farm Pigs
Here are the materials in Turunen v. Michigan Department of Natural Resources (W.D. Mich.):
The claim survived an earlier motion to dismiss here.
Materials on Makah Indian Tribe’s Request for Determination Re Quileute and Quinault Usual and Accustomed Fishing Grounds in the Pacific Ocean
There is the potential for an enormous amount of chaos for both US v. Washington and for any Indian tribe with extant treaty rights based on the arguments going on here now. Most notably, several tribes (Quinault, Quileute, and Hoh) are claiming that the Sherrill-based equitable defenses may apply in some way to Indian treaty claims.
I find this personally horrifying and disturbing — that any tribe would claim that Sherrill and its Second Circuit progeny apply to treaty rights. Sherrill is a statute-based claim, and so are the Second Circuit cases that purport to follow its reasoning. Treaty rights are an entirely different genre.
I sincerely hope the U.S. v. Washington tribes will opt-out of federal litigation — with its potential to undercut treaty rights for tribes all over the country — and move toward an inter-tribal treaty. There is at least one proposal on the table, and tribal leaders and tribal constituents should act quickly to adopt it. These inter-tribal disputes are doing nothing now but threatening to make bad law for everyone.
Luckily, Judge Martinez did not hold that equitable defenses apply here, but who knows what will happen in the Ninth Circuit and beyond.
Here are the new materials in subproceeding 09-01 of United States v. Washington (No. 70-9213) (W.D. Wash.):
248 Makah Motion for Summary J on Equitable Defenses
251 Quinault and Quileute Motion for Summary J
267 Quinault and Quileute Response to 248 Motion
274 Makah Reply in Support of 248 Motion
275 Interested Tribes Response to 251 – Equitable Defenses
279 Quileute and Quinault Reply in Support of 251
281 Quileute and Quinault Reply in Support of 251
283 Quileute and Quinault Motion to Define Burden of Proof
284 Interested Tribes Response to 283 — Burden of Proof
285 US Response to 283 — Burden of Proof
286 Upper Skagit Tribe Response to 283 — Burden of Proof
287 Makah Response to 283 — Burden of Proof
288 State of Washington Response to 283 — Burden of Proof
289 Quileute and Quinault Reply to 284 in Support of 283
290 Quileute and Quinault Reply in Support of 283
304 DCT on Motions for Summary J
Materials in a related pending Ninth Circuit matter in subproceeding 09-01 are here.
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Yakama/King Mountain Tax Dispute
Ninth Circuit Materials in Hoh/Quinault/Quileute v. Port Gamble/Jamestown/Makah Subproceeding 09-1
Here are the briefs in United States v. Washington subproceeding 09-1:
Quinault & Quileute Tribes Opening Brief
Port Gamble and Jamestown S’Klallam Tribes Answer Brief
Report on Washington Plan to Change Its Water Pollution Levels
Here’s the press release:
New Report Documents Threat to Tribal Treaty Rights and Environmental Justice
(Seattle) – The Washington State Department of Ecology is soon expected to propose new, higher, default fish consumption rates (FCRs) used to calculate allowable levels of contaminants dumped into state waters by industrial polluters. A new report from Borderlands Research and Education documents how big business and conservative and far right groups are opposing increased FCRs, threatening tribal treaty rights, environmental justice and ecological health in the state.
The report, No Justice on the Plate: Transnational Companies and the Right Oppose Fish Consumption Justice and Tribal Treaty Rights, explains how major companies and business associations are opposing higher FCRs by attacking the environmental justice principle that public policy should end disproportionate environmental impacts on communities of color. In Washington State, this includes Indian Nations and Asian and Pacific Islander communities that consume large quantities of fish. Low FCRs also affect recreational fishers in the state more than the general public.
“This effort by big business and the right poses a threat to tribal treaty rights, community health, and environmental justice,” said Borderlands Research and Education co-coordinator Chuck Tanner. “It affects us all by threatening to keep water quality in the state degraded.”
No Justice on the Plate describes how conservatives, libertarians and the far right have joined big business in opposing higher FCRs and environmental justice. The report details troubling actions of opponents of higher FCRs, including former Attorney General Rob McKenna’s alliance with far right anti-Indian leaders; the Washington Policy Center and Freedom Foundation’s opposition to tribal sovereignty; the Enumclaw-based Citizens Alliance for Property Rights’ promotion of far right conspiracy theories and outright rejection of environmental justice.
“This report addresses a critical issue for treaty and civil rights in Washington State,” said Devin Burghart, Vice-President of the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights. “And it looks at how environmental issues, and a narrow vision of property rights, can foster a convergence between big business, conservatives and the far right.”
The report is available from the Institute for Research and Education on Human Rights at http://www.irehr.org/news/special-reports/580-no-justice-on-the-plate.
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.