WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. government on May 1 urged the U.S. Supreme Court justices to deny a petition for certiorari because the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly held that a Washington state Indian tobacco company must pay federal excise taxes on its products, despite the language of an 1855 treaty (King Mountain Tobacco Co., Inc. v. United States, No. 18-984, U.S. Sup., 2019 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1622).
SAN FRANCISCO — Environmental groups on April 30 filed a petition for fees and costs in a California federal court related to their lawsuit against the Trump administration with regard to its decision to suspend most of the requirements of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Waste Prevention rule that governs methane flaring at hydraulic fracturing sites, including sites on Native American lands (Sierra Club, et al. v. David Bernhardt, et al., No. 17-7187, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on April 30 distributed for conference a dispute over whether the National Labor Relations Board has jurisdiction over Native American casinos and their tribal operators, after an Indian casino told the justices in an April 26 reply brief that the agency admitted in a similar case that the issue has produced several conflicting rulings that warrant resolution (Casino Pauma v. National Labor Relations Board, No. 18-873, U.S. Sup.).
CHICAGO — A Wisconsin Indian tribe waited too long to challenge another tribe’s competing casino operations, a slightly divided Seventh Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held April 30 in affirming dismissal of an Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) suit on statute of limitations grounds (The Stockbridge-Munsee Community v. Wisconsin, et al., No. 18-1449, 7th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 13049).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly held that foster parents in Arizona cannot challenge the constitutionality of the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) in a class action because the adoption of the children in question mooted their claims, U.S. government respondents tell the U.S. Supreme Court in an April 17 brief in opposition to certiorari (Carol Coghlan Carter, et al. v. Tara Katuk Mac Lean Sweeney, et al., No. 18-923, U.S. Sup., 2019 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1479).
BAY CITY, Mich. — A federal judge in Michigan on April 26 turned down an insurer’s request to dismiss on remand an Indian tribe’s claims that the insurer violated the Employee Retirement Income Security Act by failing to pay Medicare-like rates for hospital services under two health care plans, saying more factual development is needed at this stage of the litigation (Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe of Michigan, et al. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, No. 1:16-cv-10317, E.D. Mich., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 70688).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three tribal police officers who were arrested by a California county over a tribal faction dispute at the tribe’s casino asked the U.S. Supreme Court on April 18 to provide much-needed guidance on what facts must be pleaded to maintain a malicious prosecution case against the county and its sheriff (Ronald Jones, at al. v. Michael Keitz, et al., No. 18-1333, U.S. Sup., 2019 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1542).
SAN FRANCISCO — Two Native American tribes on April 23 filed a joint brief in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals contending that a district court is “properly situated to consider mootness” as well as vacatur and, therefore, a lawsuit against the Trump administration concerning the Keystone XL pipeline should be remanded for further consideration (Indigenous Environmental Network, et al. v. U.S. Department of State, et al., No. 18-36068, 9th Cir.).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California federal judge on April 19 said a Native American tribe has standing to seek declaratory relief for pore space under its reservation, but said the tribe lacks standing to assert a claim for quantification of how much groundwater it has a right to or to assert that the water must be of a certain quality (Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Coachella Valley Water District, et al., No. 13-00883, C.D. Calif.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A federal court correctly found that an attorney’s employment bias claims against his former employer, an Arizona Indian tribe, fail due to issue and claim preclusion because the tribe’s courts already found that the claims are barred by sovereign immunity, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held April 19 (John T. Hestand v. Gila River Indian Community, et al., No. 17-16583, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 11470).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Petitions for writs of certiorari filed by a Florida Indian tribe and one of its members challenging the federal government’s attempt to collect income taxes on gaming revenue distributions should be denied because there is no conflict among the courts and the issue is not of national importance, the government says in an April 22 U.S. Supreme Court response brief (Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States, No. 18-895, Sally Jim v. United States, No. 18-891, U.S. Sup., 2019 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1534).
CLEVELAND — The Ohio federal judge overseeing the opioid multidistrict litigation on April 18 denied a defense emergency motion to extend expert discovery, saying he “can only conclude that Defendants are proposing an indefinite postponement of the [first] trial. No Court would take such a proposal seriously” (In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2804, No. 17-md-2804, N.D. Ohio).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patron of an Indian casino whose vehicle was confiscated by the tribe after marijuana was found inside must pursue his conversion claims against a tribal police officer and a towing company in tribal court after the U.S. Supreme Court on April 22 denied the patron’s petition for a writ of certiorari (Curtiss Wilson v. Horton’s Towing, et al., No. 18-1081, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on April 22 agreed with an Indian tribe and its casino business and declined to review a 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals holding that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) does not authorize the transfer of jurisdiction from tribal courts to state courts for tort claims arising from a gaming operation (Harold McNeal, et ux. v. Navajo Nation, et al., 18-894, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO — The U.S. Government on April 8 filed a brief in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals arguing that it should remand for dismissal as moot a lawsuit brought by Native American tribes who contend that the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline would threaten their land and water because it would transport hydraulically fractured oil (Indigenous Environmental Network, et al. v. U.S. Department of State, et al., No. 18-36068, 9th Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Trump administration on April 17 filed a brief in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, contending that President Donald J. Trump had authority under the Antiquities Act to reduce the size of two national monuments because the plain language of the act is “consistent with presidential modification authority” (The Wilderness Society, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., No. 17-2587, Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, et al. v. Donald J. Trump, et al., No. 17-2591, D. D.C.).
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on April 15 tuned down a request to halt an Indian tribe’s election in a long-running dispute among warring tribal factions, saying there will be ample opportunity to contest the election once the results are in (Marie Diane Aranda, et al. v. Tara Katuk Mac Lean Sweeney, et al., No. 2:19-cv-00613, E.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 64432).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPMDL) on April 4 denied a motion by 28 municipalities and native American tribes to vacate the conditional transfer of their opioid lawsuits to the opioid multidistrict litigation (In Re: National Prescription Opiate Litigation, MDL Docket No. 2804, JPMDL, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 58890).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Native American woman cannot pursue a land takings claim against the United States under the Indian Tucker Act because individuals cannot bring claims under that statute, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held April 12 (Sharon Cloud v. United States, No. 19-1219, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 10856).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Indian tribes will not be able to use their tribal sovereign immunity to prevent patents from facing inter partes review (IPR) before the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) after the U.S. Supreme Court on April 15 declined to review the issue (Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 18-899, U.S. Sup.).