Here are the materials in Desautel v. Dupris (E.D. Wash.):
DCT Order Dismissing Desautel Complaint
Colville Motion to Dismiss
THESE ARE QUESTIONS I POSED TO MY CLASS AT UNM SOUTHWEST INDIAN LAW CLINIC.
Just the latest district court ruling that Tribal Membership is an internal matter and a Federal District Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction. Santa Clara v Martinez remains of great vitality despite a couple recent Administrative Branch (BIA/DOI) decisions to interfere in tribal membership disputes where membership was based in “Treaty Rights” or reliance on previous acts by the tribe granting recognition. Question: Should a tribe which has been “restored” or “ re-recognized” based upon administrative and court filings indicating the bases of its’ membership in order to “qualify” for federal recognition later disavow their administrative and court filings to dis-enroll members or deny membership to the members and their descendents that formed part of their qualification for administrative restoration, court decree restoration or Federal Acknowledgement Process? Is this an admission of fraud and/or misrepresentation such that a Federal District Court could find subject matter jurisdiction in the membership dispute under “federal question” jurisdiction? What about the Tribe’s sovereign immunity? Can sovereign immunity be sustained when a “tribe”, “tribal council” or “tribal officials” act outside the scope of their authority by commission of fraud?
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 10,526 other followers