Here are the new materials in United States v. Washington, subproceeding 17-03 (W.D. Wash.):
178 Stillaguamish Motion re Laches
191 Upper Skagit Response to 170
193 Stillaguamish Response to 179
194 Stillaguamish Response to 176
195 Stillaguamish Response to 174
204 Upper Skagit Reply in Support of 174
205 Tulalip Reply in Support of 176
Here are the materials in State v. Shopbell (Wash. Super. Ct.):
7. CrR 8.3(b) Motion to Dismiss for Governmental Misconduct
11. Memo In Support of Motion to Dismiss for Bad Faith
13. CrR 8.3(c) Motion to Dismiss
29. Memorandum in Opposition to Motions to Suppress Evidence and or Dismiss
30. Reply in Support of Motions to Dismiss
38. Supplemental Reply in Support of Motions to Dismiss
42. Motion for Bill of Particulars
46. Response to Motion for Bill of Particulars
52. Joint Reply In Support of Motion for Bill of Particulars
63. Supplemental Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to CrR 8.3(c)
66. Defendants’ Joint Motion to Dismiss and Renewed Motion to Dismiss per CrR 8.3
68. Defendants’ Supplemental Motion to Dismiss
69. Response to Pretrial Dismissal Motions
70. Reply on Pretrial Dismissal Motions
There was no written ruling, but from the bench the Judge explained:
“My decision is consistent with the heart of the Treaty & Rafeedie Consent Decree, preserving Treaty rights that were gained many years ago. This court shouldn’t be involved in those issues.”
Here are the updated materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.), subproceeding 19-01:
Earlier briefs here.
Here are the materials in State of Washington v. Shopbell (Wash. Ct. App. — Div. 1):
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington, subproceeding 89-03 (W.D. Wash.):
Here are the notices of withdrawal of laches as a defense in United States v. Washington subproceeding 17-03 (W.D. Wash.):
Sub 17-03 Swinomish Indian Tribal Community Notice of Withdrawal of Laches Defense 011921
Sub 17-03 The Tulalip Tribes Withdrawal of Laches Defense 011921
Sub 17-03 Upper Skagit Indian Tribe Withdrawal of Laches Defense 011921
As I wrote in 2015, I see this as a good thing — the possibility that the laches defense could be used against tribal treaty rights has hung like a smoggy haze over Indian country ever since 2005. It staggers me to think that tribes would do this to themselves for short-term, and probably illusory, gain.
Here are the materials in Lacy v. Snohomish County (Wash. Ct. App.):
4-15-19 Appellant’s Opening Brief
5-17-19 Respondent Cross Appellant’s Brief
6-14-19 Appellant’s Reply Brief
Prior post here.
Here are the new materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.), subproceeding 19-01:
Prior post here.
Here is news coverage.
Here are the materials in United States v. Washington (W.D. Wash.), subproceeding no. 19-01:
1-motion-for-leave-to-file.pdf
3-request-for-determination.pdf
8-swinomish-motion-for-tro.pdf
13-upper-skagit-motion-for-tro.pdf
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.