Update in Maverick Gaming Challenge to IGRA — New Venue and Rule 19 Motion to Dismiss

Here are the new materials in Maverick Gaming LLC v. United States (W.D. Wash.):

Prior post here.

Shoalwater Bay is serious.

Ninth Circuit Materials in Tribal Challenge to Seattle’s Dams

Here are the briefs in Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle:

Lower court materials here.

Washington Federal Court Rules in Favor of Suquamish over Insurance Company in Tribal Court Jurisdiction Dispute

Here are the materials in Suquamish Tribe v. Smith (W.D. Wash.):

Puget Sound and Seattle from Suquamish

Washington Federal Court Keeps Muckleshoot Out as Party in Duwamish Recognition Suit

Here are the materials in Duwamish Tribe v. Haaland (W.D. Wash.):

14 Muckleshoot Motion to Intervene

18 Duwamish Opposition

20 Interior Opposition

21 Reply

26 DCT Order

Complaint here.

Washington Federal Court Orders Tribal Court Exhaustion in Sauk-Suiattle Dam Suit

Here are the materials in City of Seattle v. Sauk-Suiattle Tribal Court (W.D. Wash.):

Prior post here.

Snoqualmie v. Washington Cert Petition


Questions presented:

  1. Whether the federal courts have the constitutional authority to unilaterally abrogate all rights guaranteed to an Indian tribe under a treaty with the United States absent congressional action.
  2. Whether the Ninth Circuit erred by applying issue preclusion to hold that Snoqualmie was not a party to the Treaty even though the Executive Branch expressly recognizes Snoqualmie as a Treaty party.

Lower court materials here.

Amicus briefs in support of the petition:

Washington Federal Court Orders Insurance Company to Exhaust Tribal Court Remedies

Here are the materials in Allstate Insurance Co. v. Cornelson (W.D. Wash.):

Great Hall of the Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe

Judge Martinez Orders Trial in Stillaguamish U&A Subproceeding

Skagit canoes pulled up onto beach near Coupeville, Whidbey Island Washington, ca. 1895

Here are the new materials in United States v. Washington, subproceeding 17-03 (W.D. Wash.):

170 Stillaguamish Motion

174 Upper Skagit Motion

176 Tulalip Motion

178 Stillaguamish Motion re Laches

179 Swinomish Motion

191 Upper Skagit Response to 170

193 Stillaguamish Response to 179

194 Stillaguamish Response to 176

195 Stillaguamish Response to 174

198 Swinomish Response to 170

200 Tulalip Response to 170

204 Upper Skagit Reply in Support of 174

205 Tulalip Reply in Support of 176

206 Stillaguamish Reply in Support of 170

207 Swinomish Reply in Support of 179

Samish Indian Nation v. Washington Cert Petition



Questions presented:

  1. Whether Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and tribal sovereign immunity deprived the lower courts of subject-matter jurisdiction over the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe’s claim, requiring dismissal on that ground under United States Supreme Court precedent including Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83 (1996).
  2. Whether, under United States Supreme Court precedent including Ruhrgas AG v. Marathon Oil Co., 526 U.S. 574 (1999) and Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Intern. Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007), an issue preclusion dismissal is a merits dismissal and excluded from the threshold grounds among which a federal court may choose to dismiss a case before establishing its subject-matter jurisdiction.
  3. Whether, under United States Supreme Court precedent including Sinochem Int’l Co. v. Malaysia Intern. Shipping Corp., 549 U.S. 422 (2007), jurisdictional issues in this case were not “arduous” or “difficult to determine” because the lower courts could readily determine that they lacked jurisdiction, such that those courts committed reversible error in bypassing determination of their subject-matter jurisdiction and proceeding to dismiss the case instead with prejudice on issue preclusion grounds.
“Siwash” Indians Harvesting Hops at Snoqualmie

Lower court materials here.