Yurok tribe

Yurok Tribe Now Accepting Law Clerk Applications for Spring and Summer 2016

Sarah M Donnelly

A complete description and application instructions here.

Yurok Tribal Attorney Job Postings

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The Yurok Tribe is seeking applicants for either the Attorney I or Attorney II position. Full job descriptions are below, or can be viewed at http://www.yuroktribe.org/departments/personnel/announcements.htm.

StaffAttorney_010

StaffAttorneyII2014 (1)

Federal Court Rules in Favor of Interior and Lower Klamath River Tribes in Water Dispute

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Jewell (E.D. Cal.):

95 First Amended Complaint

113 Water Districts Motion for Summary J

116 Pacific Coast Federation of Fisherman Opposition

118 Hoopa Opposition

119 Yurok Opposition

120-1 US Opposition

122 California Amicus Opposition

125 Water Districts Reply

132 Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen Reply

133 Hoopa Reply

134 Yurok Reply

135 US Reply 

175 DCT Order

News coverage here: “Judge won’t stop emergency water releases helping Klamath Basin salmon.”

UPDATE 10/8/14:

181 DCT Order on Cross Motions for Summary J

NYTs Article on Yurok Language Revitalization

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Placement Preferences, Guardianship, and Identifying Tribe Unpublished ICWA Case from California

Kate Fort1 Comment

Unpublished opinion here.

California COA Appeals Decides ICWA Notice Case, Reversing and Remanding for Proper Notice to Karuk Tribe

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in In re Guardianship of D.W.

An excerpt:

The record in the present case discloses that from the outset of these proceedings until respondent was appointed the minor‟s guardian, appellant consistently informed the court that the minor had Indian ancestry, and that his father was an enrolled member of the Yurok or Karuk tribes. “Because „biological descendance‟ is often a prerequisite for tribal membership . . . [a relative‟s] suggestion that [the child] „might‟ be an Indian child [is] enough” to satisfy the minimal showing required to trigger the statutory notice provisions. (Antoinette S., supra, 104 Cal.App.4th at p. 1408, fn. omitted.) In carrying out its obligation under the ICWA to provide notice, the court incorrectly assigned appellant, the party objecting to the guardianship, the responsibility of providing notice to the possible Indian tribes.

NY Times on Shutdown and Tribes

Kate Fort

Here.

Aaron Payment, the chairman of the Sault Tribe of Chippewa Indians in Michigan, said his tribe had already shut down its H.I.V. prevention program and furloughed employees for its Head Start program for a month because of sequestration.

Now, with nearly $1 million in federal money lost since the shutdown, the tribe is scrambling to shift casino revenue from other programs to keep its government afloat.

“We’re in turmoil right now,” Mr. Payment said. “The impact here is going to be felt by the people who need the services the most.”

Kevin Washburn, assistant secretary for Indian affairs, said the shutdown could have long-term effects on tribes and tribal members. Financial deals and economic programs have been suspended. Environmental reviews of tribal projects will be delayed. And the impact on the thousands of Bureau of Indian Affairs employees who have been furloughed is compounded because many support poor relatives, he said.

Materials in Trinity River Flow Suit

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in San Luis & Delta-Mendota Water Authority v. Jewell (E.D. Cal.):

DCT Order Lifting TRO and Denying Preliminary Injunction

Water Districts Motion

Fisheries Opposition

Hoopa Opposition

Interior Opposition

Leshy Memorandum

Water Districts Reply

News coverage here.

LATimes on the Revivial of the Yurok Language

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Cal. COA Decides ICWA Case involving Yurok Traditional Adoption Statute

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion:

In re HR

An excerpt:

In 2010, legislation was enacted establishing “tribal customary adoption” as an alternative permanent plan for a dependent Indian child who cannot be reunited with his or her parents. Tribal customary adoption is intended to provide an Indian child with the same stability and permanency as traditional adoption under state law without the termination of parental rights, which is contrary to the cultural beliefs of many Native American tribes. In this case, the Yurok Tribe (the tribe) intervened in the dependency proceedings prior to the jurisdictional hearing and recommended tribal customary adoption as the permanent plan for the minor. The tribe now contends the juvenile court erred in terminating parental rights and selecting traditional adoption as the permanent plan. We disagree with the tribe’s contention that the court was required to select tribal customary adoption as the child’s permanent plan simply because the tribe elected such a plan but conclude that, in the absence of a finding that tribal customary adoption would be detrimental to the minor, the court erred in failing to select such a permanent plan in this case.