Tribal Government Business Law Session 2 - Supreme Court Barriers to Land Acquisition
2.75 General, including 0.0 Ethics Credits | WSBA AV CLE Activity #375660
This session will explore the Court's direction in Indian Law and assess the implications for tribes in the years ahead, in light of the 2009, 2011, and 2014 opinions in Carcieri v. Salazar; Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak; and Michigan v. Bay Mills.
Credits: 2.75 General, including 0.0 Ethics | WSBA AV CLE Activity #375660
Bruce R. Greene & Professor Richard Collins
In 2009 and 2011 the Supreme Court issued opinions in Carcieri v. Salazar and Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Patchak which have created significant uncertainty and imposed barriers to tribal efforts to place land in trust for economic development purposes. The Court's barriers were never intended by the Congress when it authorized the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land in trust for the tribes. This year the Court's decision in Michigan v. Bay Mills is widely anticipated to result in a diminishment of tribal sovereign immunity and continue the Court's steady erosion of the authority of tribes to govern their homelands and develop their economies. This session will explore the Court's direction in Indian law and assess the implications for tribes in the years ahead.
Introduction - Eric Eberhard - Seattle University School of Law
Part 1 - The Supreme Court's Barriers to Land Acquisition
Part 2 - The Supreme Court's Barriers to Land Acquisition
Bruce R. Greene has been practicing law for 47 years, including 39 years focused on Federal Indian law. He served as a court appointed federal mediator in U.S. v. Washington sub-proceedings; as the Director of Litigation in the Navajo Nation Department of Justice; the Director of California Indian Legal Services, as a Staff Attorney at the Native American Rights Fund; as an invited lecturer for Federal District Court and Circuit Court of Appeals judges on Indian law issues; negotiation of Tribal/Sate gaming compacts and tax agreements. Bruce's work has resulted in a long list of significant decisions rendered by federal and state courts at all levels in major Indian law cases covering an array of issues ranging from treaty rights to the management of trust funds and resources. Most recently, Bruce participated in the development of the Supreme Court brief for the Bay Mills Indian Community in Michigan v. Bay Mills.
Richard Collins spent 15 years practicing Indian law with organizations such as California Rural Legal Assistance, California Indian Legal Services, Dinebeiina Nahiilna Be Agaditahe in Window Rock, Arizona, and the Native American Rights Fund (NARF). He is a Professor at the University of Colorado School of Law where he teaches Indian Law, Constitutional Law and Property. Professor Collins has continued work as a pro bono consultant to NARF and to Native American tribes, including the Southern Ute Indian Tribe. During the course of his appellate work, he has had a major role in several important Indian law decisions, including United States Supreme Court decisions such as McClanahan v. Arizona Tax Commission, 421 U.S. 164 (1973). His scholarship also focuses on constitutional issues, and he was Director of the law school's Byron R. White Center for the Study of American Constitutional Law from 2002 to 2010. Most recently, Professor Collins filed an amicus brief in the Supreme Court on the subject of tribal sovereign immunity in Michigan v. Bay Mills.
General Registration - $85.00
Seattle University School of Law Alumni - $70.00
Tribal Attorneys - $70.00