D.C. Federal Court Rejects FBI Reasons for Not Acknowledging Cayuga Nation Police

Here are the materials in Cayuga Nation v. United States (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

12 Amended Complaint

16-1 US Motion for Summary J

20 Cayuga Cross Motion

22 US Reply

24 Cayuga Reply

The FBI’s decision had a lot to do with this. . . .

Texas Appellate Court Suppresses Evidence Acquired by Tribal Police because of State’s Failure to Prove Tribe Had Power to Detain under Cooley

Here are the materials in State of Texas v. Astorga (Tex. Ct. App. El Paso):

Opinion

State Brief

Astorga Brief

Reply

Letter Brief

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

SCOTUS Reverses in United States v. Cooley

Here is the unanimous opinion from Justice Breyer.

An excerpt:

The question presented is whether an Indian tribe’s police officer has authority to detain temporarily and to search a non-Indian on a public right-of-way that runs through an Indian reservation. The search and detention, we assume, took place based on a potential violation of state or federal law prior to the suspect’s transport to the proper nontribal authorities for prosecution.
We have previously noted that a tribe retains inherent sovereign authority to address “conduct [that] threatens or has some direct effect on . . . the health or welfare of the tribe.” Montana v. United States, 450 U. S. 544, 566 (1981); see also Strate v. A–1 Contractors, 520 U. S. 438, 456, n. 11 (1997). We believe this statement of law governs here. And we hold the tribal officer possesses the authority at issue.

Another excerpt:

More broadly, cross-deputization agreements are difficult to reach, and they often require negotiation between other authorities and the tribes over such matters as training, reciprocal authority to arrest, the “geographical reach of the agreements, the jurisdiction of the parties, liability of officers performing under the agreements, and sovereign immunity.” Fletcher, Fort, & Singel, Indian Country Law Enforcement and Cooperative Public Safety Agreements, 89 Mich. Bar J. 42, 44 (2010).

Here are the briefs and other background materials.

Federal Court Dismisses Tribal Police Officer Suit against Moapa Band

Here are the materials in Dutchover v. Moapa Band of Paiute Indians (D. Nev.):

8 Amended Complaint

28 Motion to Dismiss

37 Response

42 Reply

53 DCT Order

Federal Court Dismisses Section 1983 Claim against Warm Springs Police Dept. Brought by Former Tribal Police Officer

Here are the materials in Weaver v. Gregory (D. Or.):

1 Complaint

10 Motion to Dismiss

14 Response

16 Reply

18 DCT Order