You are here

American Indian law

Landmark Event On Indigenous Rights Overshadowed

The landmark World Conference of Indigenous Peoples has been far from the limelight "during a frantic week in New York when world leaders gathered to discuss climate change and the security situation in Syria and Iraq," Radio Australia reports. Kalama Oka Aina Niheu, who is from Hawaii, told Radio Australia that the conference did not provide an avenue for indigenous peoples to voice their concerns about climate change and demilitarization because those issues were kept off that UN conference's agenda. The North American Indian Peoples caucus withdrew its support from the conference, she reports. As a result, she expressed a concern that the conference would be turned into an international version of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs and "people who are going to be supported and uplifted in this process are going to be people who support extractive industries and who support mechanisms that actually disempower indigenous peoples," she said in the interview.

Navajo Nation Gets $554 Million Settlement Over Federal Mismanagement

The federal government will pay the Navajo Nation $554 million to settle claims that it mismanaged funds and natural resources on the Navajo reservation, according to the Wall Street Journal's Dan Frosch. It's highest-ever such settlement in a case about land the federal government held in trust for an American Indian tribe, according to the WSJ. The Obama administration has paid out more than $1 billion "during the past several years to settle lawsuits filed by dozens of tribes who have made similar claims regarding the chronic mismanagement of trust land and resources by the federal government," the WSJ further reports.

Violence Against Women Act 'Putting Justice Back' in American Indian Hands

MintPress News' Christine Graef reports on how a revised Violence Against Women Act is putting tribal authorities in charge of cases of abuse and violence against American Indian women: "The reauthorized act extends tribal jurisdiction to non-Native Americans who commit acts of violence or sexual assault against their Native American spouse or partner. While such incidents often go unreported, the amount that are reported reflect a disproportionate number of Native American women will be raped, stalked or physically assaulted compared to their non-Native American peers." According to the Indian Law Research Center, more than 88 percent of violent crimes committed against American Indian women are committed by non-American Indians over which tribal governments lack jurisdiction.

The amendment goes into effect next March.

There are limitations to the amended law. Tribes must have a criminal justice system that provides legal counsel to defendants, provide non-American Indians in a jury pool and inform defendants of their right to file federal habeas corups petitions, Graef writes. Federal prosecutors will continue to prosecute crimes for tribes that don't have their own justice systems. And jurisdiction only applies to cases in which the perpetrator and the victim were in a relationship.

Federal Agency Accused of Violating Law Protecting American Indian Remains

According to the Associated Press, the Interior Department's Bureau of Reclamation is being accused of violating a law meant to protect the cultural property of American Indian tribes. The U.S. Office of Special Counsel has told the Interior Department to investigate if the bureau has violated the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which provides a way for American Indian remains and other cultural property to be returned to tribes out of federal custody. The law was enacted to rectify a history in which American Indian remains and sacred objects were scooped up into museum archives and the hands of government bureaucrats.

A whistleblower reported that the office was not keeping detailed records that would ensure the law functions the way it is supposed to, the AP reports.

The remains and artifacts were collected during the construction of dams and waterways in California, Nevada and Oregon, according to the AP.

Michigan Can't Block American Indian Casino After Supreme Court Ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court, 5-4, has ruled that Michigan can't block an off-reservation American Indian casino from opening because of tribal sovereignity, the Associated Press reports: "The ruling was a win for Indian tribes, which have increasingly looked to casinos as a source of revenue and have relied on immunity to shield them from government interference. But it's a disappointment for Michigan and more than a dozen others states that say the decision will interfere with their ability to crack down on unauthorized tribal casinos."

Excessive Force Case Results In Rare Plaintiff Victory In Tribal Court

Submitted by Amaris Elliott-Engel on Tue, 05/20/2014 - 08:30

Here's a version of the article I wrote for the Connecticut Law Tribune about what may be the first plaintiffs' victory in an excessive force case involving a police officer from the Mohegan Tribe or the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation:

When a drunken bar patron gets forcefully subdued by a police officer and wins a five-figure verdict as a result, it's usually not big news. But move a similar confrontation to an American Indian casino, and that’s a different story.

A patron of the Mohegan Sun Casino has prevailed in what may be the first successful excessive force claim against a tribal police officer in Connecticut, according to the plaintiff's attorney who won the case.

Mary Puhlick, Puhlick & Cartier, in Norwich, regularly practices in the courts of both the Mohegan tribe and the Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation. The recent $92,344 judgment rendered in favor of her client "is the first [successful] tort claim in either tribal court involving use of force by a police officer," Puhlick said in an interview.

Mohegan Gaming Disputes Court Chief Judge Paul Guernsey, in an April 28 opinion, rule that arresting officer Todd Maikshilo was not justified in using a control technique that resulted in serious ligament and bone damage to the plaintiff's leg.

Even after calling plaintiff Jerry D'Ambra Jr.'s behavior "drunken and obnoxious," Guernsey said he was entitled to more than $32,000 in actual damages and $60,000 in non-economic damages. At the time, D'Ambra worked as the equipment manager in his family's construction business and was attending flight school.

D'Ambra, then 20, visited Mohegan Sun with an older friend, Merrick Bolcum, then 49, almost five years ago in order to attend a concert of country singer Eric Church. D'Ambra reached his drunken state by consuming three large rum and Cokes poured into large Dunkin' Donut travel mugs, according to the written opinion.

Later in the evening, D'Ambra threw up in the men's room and security officers took him and his friend to Krispy Kreme at the casino premises for coffee and doughnuts. D'Ambra and Bolcum were both given a Breathalyzer test, and the results revealed they were both unfit to drive. They were both told to wait two hours before heading back home to Rhode Island.

After the plaintiff said he was going to get sick again and needed fresh air, Security Officer Edward Martin walked outside with him. Martin testified that D'Ambra got increasingly belligerent. Martin called for a tribal police officer. Maikshilo was the first officer to arrive.

Maikshilo testified that D'Ambra swore at the two of them, challenged them to Taser him and put both hands behind his back in a dare to the officers to arrest him.

After Maikshilo and another tribal officer arrested D'Ambra, they said the the plaintiff attempted to lunge away. Maikshilo said he needed to bring D'Ambra under control for his own safety, and that he applied his right foot to the rear of D'Ambra's left calf, bringing the man down onto Maikshilo's extended right leg.

"Maikshilo conducted a memorable in-court demonstration of the effectiveness of this maneuver on plaintiff's counsel," the judge commented in his opinion. "His skill in performing it was impressive."

D'Ambra offered contradictory testimony. He said he encountered Maikshilo on his way out of the casino, and that he ignored the officer's request to go to the men's room. He acknowledged the Taser challenge, but denied trying to run away from the officers. He said he leaned over, put his hands on his knees, got whacked on his knee from behind and fell forward with his face landing on the mulch. "'That's when I got loud, after I was on the ground and handcuffed,"' D'Ambra testified.

If D'Ambra's account is correct, Guernsey said, it is unsurprising that there was no surveillance video of the incident because it would have taken place off to the side of one of the casino's valet entrances. The officers testified that the incident took place closer to the front of the valet entrance, making "the lack of video surveillance puzzling," Guernsey said.

There was probable cause to arrest D'Ambra for breaching the peace, the judge said. But the question was if there was probable cause for the officer to use the control maneuver to take him down.

The judge found D'Ambra's testimony persuasive in finding the controlling maneuver — called a rear sentry takedown — constituted excessive force by the officer. Guernsey also credited the testimony of defense expert Reginald Allard, who taught, for 23 years, the rear sentry takedown and other methods of control at the Connecticut State Police Academy.

Allard testified that he has never had an injury result from recruits practicing rear sentry takedowns. "Hundreds, thousands of times that I've applied it, had it applied to me, to the recruits, we've never had an injury based on the strike itself causing injury to the recruit," the defense expert testified.

The result of Maikshilo's maneuver was a torn anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and a fractured tibia. The plaintiff needed surgery in July 2009 to remove a loose piece of bone almost two inches in length.

The Mohegan Torts Code provides the tribe and its officials with immunity from most lawsuits. But the judge said that immunity did not apply in this case. He went on to apply the Fourth Amendment and its reasonableness standard in determining whether the tribal officer used excessive force on the plaintiff.

"The court finds that Maikshilo's decision to perform the modified rear sentry takedown satisfies the standard of objective reasonableness… [But] the force applied to the back of D'Ambra's knee, sufficient to break off a two-inch piece of bone within the knee … was far beyond what was objectively reasonable under the circumstances faced by Maikshilo and constituted a tort within the limited waiver of sovereign immunity in the Mohegan Torts Code," Guernsey said.

Puhlick said it was interesting that the judge chose to apply federal constitutional law even though the Mohegan tribe — while it has adopted Connecticut common law — has not adopted the U.S. Constitution. The Mohegan tribe has its own constitution.

Defense counsel Robert Rhodes, of Halloran & Sage, in Westport, did not respond to a request for comment, including on whether his clients will appeal. Appeals are heard by the other four judges of the tribal court sitting en banc.

 

Arizona Tribe to Prosecute First Domestic Violence Case Involving Non-Indian

The Pascua Yaqui is going to be the first American Indian tribe to prosecute a non-American Indian for domestic violence after the Violence Against Women Act was expanded to allow American Indian tribes to have that enforcement authority, the Washington Post reports. While the law is meant to address violent crimes inflicted on Native women by non-Native men, the law does not address every such circumstance: "While it covers domestic and dating-violence cases involving Native Americans on the reservation, the law does not give tribes jurisdiction to prosecute child abuse or crimes, including sexual assault, that are committed by non-Indians who are 'strangers' to their victims. In addition, the law does not extend to Native American women in Alaska," the Post reports.

Court Rules FTC Has Authority Over Lending by American Indian Tribes

A Nevada federal judge has ruled that the Federal Trade Commission can sue payday lenders, even if they are affiliated with American Indian tribes, the Legal Times reports. The judge ruled "that the FTC Act is a statute of general applicability, one that does not include an exception for Indian tribes," the Legal Times further reported. Tribes argue that they are sovereign and free from regulation by state governments and the U.S. federal government.

Lawsuit Threatened Against Oregon's New American Indian Mascot Law

Oregon has passed a law to allow school districts to enter into agreements with American Indian tribes to use American Indian mascots and names. But the law is already being threatened by possible litigiation: "Sam Sachs, a racial-justice activist who also is a Portland Human Rights Commissioner, said the state Board of Education is obligated to create a safe environment for all Oregon children to learn free of discrimination and bullying. 'But this new law does not get there,' Sachs said of the bill, which will allow a district school board to enter into an approved written agreement with federally recognized American Indian tribes in Oregon to use a mascot that represents, is associated with, or is significant to the tribe," the Statesman Journal reports.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - American Indian law