Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law Commons^™

Courts Of Indian Offenses, Courts Of Indian Resistance, Alexandra Fay

Michigan Law Review

In the late nineteenth century, the Department of the Interior created the Courts of Indian Offenses with the express goal of eliminating elements of Native culture through the coercive power of criminal law. The courts stood on dubious constitutional grounds, were almost universally replaced by tribal courts in the twentieth century, and have been widely derided as crude assimilationist tools.

This Article examines the Courts of Indian Offenses to study how law and legal institutions operate as sites of colonial struggle. The Courts of Indian Offenses were formally created to criminalize Native culture. In practice, they were more complicated. Native …

Nanaboozhoo Died For Your Sins, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Michigan Law Review

A review of Custer Died for Your Sins: An Indian Manifesto By Vine Deloria, Jr.

Tribal Legal Licensing Of Attorneys, House Counsel Status, And The Opportunity To Redefine The Jd Preferred Position And The Entire Lawyer Ecosystem, Nicholas J. Stamates

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The recognized right of Indian Tribes to license has been a known reality dating back to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832) where state law was found inapplicable on the lands of the Cherokee. However, the modern implications of tribal licensing and regulation have only just begun to be explored in the context of the modern American regulatory system. In fact, the ability of Indian Tribes to license attorneys to practice law within their court systems has largely gone unexamined outside of a few exceptions such as the Tribal Law and Order Act …

Blood Quantum And The Auto-Colonization Of The Michigan Anishinaabek, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Book Chapters

Anishinaabe storyteller Basil Johnston described the chronological path of life in four stages, what he called the four hills of life. The first stage, linked to the East, is infancy and early childhood, a time of preparation and listening. The second stage, linked to the South, is youth, a time of doing things. The third stage, linked to the West, is adulthood, a time of vision. The fourth stage, linked to the North, is Old Age, a time of the fulfillment of the vision and a time of sacred learning and teaching.

The twelve Michigan Anishinaabek tribal nations are in …

Against Judicial Generalists, Matthew L.R. Fletcher

Other Publications

There is something irritatingly wrong with Indian law practice at the Supreme Court.

Oral argument at the Supreme Court is a bitterly unpleasant affair for Indigenous people and tribal advocates for a lengthy variety of reasons. It is canonical that tribal advocates must attempt to avoid Supreme Court review; the strategic thinking is that the Court is the last place an Indian tribe would ever want to be. No Indigenous person has argued a case before the Supreme Court since 2001, approaching a quarter century. Only a tiny handful of Indigenous people have ever clerked for a Supreme Court justice. …

The Three Lives Of Mamengwaa: Toward An Indigenous Canon Of Construction, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

For too long, tribal judiciaries have been an afterthought in the story of tribal selfdetermination. Until the last half-century, many tribal nations relied on federally administered courts or had no court systems at all. As tribal nations continue to develop their law-enforcement and police powers, tribal justice systems now play a critical role in tribal self-determination. But because tribal codes and constitutions tend to borrow extensively from federal and state law, tribal judges find themselves forced to apply and enforce laws that are poor cultural fits for Indian communities—an unfortunate reality that hampers tribal judges’ ability to regulate and improve …

Ai And Tribal Court Practice, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

American Indian tribal court practice resides at the intersection of two difficult legal problems. First, because tribal justice systems are usually very young and dynamic, awareness and analysis of tribal law is underdeveloped. Second, because tribal nations are not governed by state or federal law, tribal law is culturally unique. Tribal court practitioners often find that even routine legal matters will involve questions of first impression in the jurisdiction. All of this is to say tribal court jurisprudence is intensely jurisgenerative.

Because tribal law is often unsettled or indeterminate, the costs of discovering and applying this law are occasionally high. …

The Sovereignty Problem In Federal Indian Law, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

There is a sovereignty problem in federal Indian law-namely, that the federal government's sovereign defenses prevent tribal nations and individual Indian people from realizing justice in the courts. Often, compelling tribal and Indian claims go nowhere as the judiciary defers to the interests of the United States, even where Congress has expressly stated its support for tribal interests. Conversely, tribal judiciaries allow claims to proceed to the merits, invoking customary and traditional law to hold tribal governments accountable.

Sovereignty theory helps to explain why justice can be done in one court system but not another. But federal, state, and tribal …

Nanaboozhoo And Derrick Bell Go For A Walk, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

When the Anishinaabeg were new to Anishinaabewaki, they knew little about how to fend for themselves. The animals and plants took pity on them and taught the Anishinaabeg. One winter, as the food stores of the Anishinaabeg were running out, an ininaatig (maple tree) saw an Anishinaabe innini (man) weakly scavenge for food. The ininaatig decided to offer part of itself to the Anishinaabeg. The ininaatig told the innini to cut off a branch. Ininaatigwabo, delicious, thick maple syrup, oozed from the stump. There was enough to feed the innini for many days. And there were many, many ininaatigoog …

Fletcher's Uncertainty Principle, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

am here to talk about the equal protection challenges facing Indian Country. I am going to give you my thesis right off the bat, which is that Haaland v. Brackeen decided the equal protection issue for us already, and we should behave as if it is decided.

I will explain what I mean by that. But first, let’s talk about what we will call the Mancari rule. The Mancari rule is fundamentally what Indian law is about, and it goes something like this—I am going to more or less paraphrase the guiding principle of Morton v. Mancari from 1974. Any …

Bizindan Miinawa (Listen Again), Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Articles

Johnson v. McIntosh was as fake as John Wayne’s teeth. That one was a property dispute, remember? Two wealthy, privileged, and powerful white people squared off over thousands of acres of land acquired from Indigenous nations who called the vast valley of Eagle River home. On one side, you had a former United States Supreme Court Justice; on the other, you had a wealthy political benefactor/beneficiary. No tribal nations or Indigenous peoples to be seen or heard from. And of course, the competing property claims at issue barely overlapped, if at all, thanks to stipulations of the parties at the …

Reviving Indian Country: Expanding Alaska Native Villages’ Tribal Land Bases Through Fee-To-Trust Acquisitions, Alexis Studler

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

For the last fifty years, the possibility of fee-to-trust acquisitions in Alaska has been precarious at best. This is largely due to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), which eschewed the traditional reservation system in favor of corporate land ownership and management. Despite its silence on trust acquisitions, ANCSA was and still is cited as the primary prohibition to trust acquisitions in Alaska. Essentially, ANCSA both reduced Indian Country in Alaska and prohibited any opportunities to create it, leaving Alaska Native Villages without the significant territorial jurisdiction afforded to Lower 48 tribes. However, recent policy changes from …

A Framework For Managing Disputes Over Intellectual Property Rights In Traditional Knowledge, Stephen R. Munzer

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Major controversies in moral and political theory concern the rights, if any, Indigenous peoples should have over their traditional knowledge. Many scholars, including me, have tackled these controversies. This Article addresses a highly important practical issue: Can we come up with a solid framework for resolving disputes over actual or proposed intellectual property rights in traditional knowledge?

Yes, we can. The framework suggested here starts with a preliminary distinction between control rights and income rights. It then moves to four categories that help to understand disputes: nature of the traditional knowledge under dispute; dynamics between named parties to disputes; unnamed …

Federal Indian Law As Method, Matthew L. M. Fletcher

Articles

Morton v. Mancari is well-known in Indian law circles as a foundation for the tribal self-determination era, which is generally understood to have begun in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The case involved an Act of Congress that required the federal “Indian Office” (now called the Bureau of Indian Affairs) to grant preference in employment to “Indians.” The case is typically understood as the basis for analyzing how federal statutes that apply exclusively to Indian people do not implicate the anti-discrimination principles of the United States Constitution. This understanding of the case, while correct, is too narrow.

Restorative Justice For International Traditional Cultural Expression Ownership Disputes, Sandra H. Sulzer

Michigan Journal of International Law

Traditional cultural expressions (“TCE”), which include dances, songs, and pottery, and traditional knowledge (“TK”), which includes plant properties, agricultural practices, and artistic techniques, are inarguably valuable both to the groups that create them and to outsiders who wish to use or sell them. International law broadly, and intellectual property (“IP”) law more specifically, are not well-suited to protect the interests of creators of TCE and TK. A persistent pattern of exploitation of traditional expressions and knowledge has been well-documented. But responses have been dissatisfying, and sometimes begin from a place of disregarding the value of these contributions. At present, when …

Revising The Indian Plenary Power Doctrine, M. Henry Ishitani, Alexandra Fay

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

The federal Indian law doctrine of Congressional plenary power is long overdue for an overhaul. Since its troubling nineteenth-century origins in Kagama v. United States (1886), plenary power has justified invasive Congressional interventions and undermined Tribal sovereignty. The doctrine's legal basis remains a constitutional conundrum. This Article considers the Court's recent engagement with plenary power in Haaland v. Brackeen (2023). It argues that the Brackeen opinions may signal judicial readiness to reevaluate the doctrine. The Article takes ahold of Justice Gorsuch's critical assessment and runs with it, ultimately proposing a method for cleaning up this destructive and constitutionally dubious line …

Lac Du Flambeau Band Of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians V. Coughlin: Brief On Behalf Of Amici Curiae Professors Of Federal Indian Law In Support Of Petitioner, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Appellate Briefs

Amici law professors listed in the Appendix are leading scholars and teachers of federal Indian law, with expertise in the rules of statutory interpretation that preserve the sovereign immunity of Native Nations absent Congress’s unequivocal expression of its intent to abrogate it. They file this brief out of a shared belief that the decision below is irreconcilable with this Court’s precedents and encroaches upon Congress’s constitutional authority to determine federal Indian policy.<\p>

The question of statutory interpretation in this case is answered by two bedrock principles of federal Indian law and the constitutional separation of powers between Congress and the …

Due Process And Equal Protection In Michigan Anishinaabe Courts, Matthew Fletcher

Articles

In 1968, largely because the United States Constitution does not apply to tribal government activity, Congress enacted the Indian Civil Rights Act–a federal law that requires tribal governments to guarantee due process and equal protection to persons under tribal jurisdiction. In 1978, the Supreme Court held that persons seeking to enforce those federal rights may do so in tribal forums only; federal and state courts are unavailable. Moreover, the Court held that tribes may choose to interpret the meanings of “due process” and “equal protection” in line with tribal laws, including customary laws. Since the advent of the self-determination era …

Toward Self-Determination In The U.S. Territories: The Restorative Justice Implications Of Rejecting The Insular Cases, Sarah M. Kelly

Michigan Journal of Race and Law

Conservatives and liberals alike are increasingly calling for condemnation of the Insular Cases—a series of U.S. Supreme Court cases from the early 1900s, in which the Court developed the doctrine of territorial incorporation to license the United States’ indefinite holding of overseas colonial possessions. In March 2021, members of the U.S. House of Representatives introduced House Resolution 279, which declares that the Insular Cases should be rejected as having no place in U.S. constitutional law. Moreover, in 2022, Justice Gorsuch called for the Supreme Court to squarely overrule the cases.

For many, rejecting the Insular Cases is a long-overdue reckoning …

The Indian Child Welfare Act In The Multiverse, M. Alexander Pearl

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl By Matthew L.M. Fletcher and Kathryn E. Fort, in Critical Race Judgments: Rewritten U.S. Court Opinions on Race and the Law 452, 471. Edited by Bennett Capers, Devon W. Carbado, R.A. Lenhardt and Angela Onwuachi-Willig.

Restoring Indian Reservation Status: An Empirical Analysis, Michael K. Velchik, Jeffery Zhang

Articles

In McGirt v. Oklahoma, the Supreme Court held that the eastern half of Oklahoma was Indian country. This bombshell decision was contrary to settled expectations and government practices spanning 111 years. It also was representative of an increasing trend of federal courts recognizing Indian sovereignty over large and economically significant areas of the country, even where Indians have not asserted these claims in many years and where Indians form a small minority of the inhabitants.

Although McGirt and similar cases fundamentally turn on questions of statutory and treaty interpretation, they are often couched in consequence-based arguments about the good …

Textualism And The Indian Canons Of Statutory Construction, Alex Tallchief Skibine

University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform

When interpreting statutes enacted for the benefit or regulation of Indians or construing treaties signed with Indian nations, courts are supposed to apply any of five specific canons of construction relating to Indian Affairs. Through examining the modern line of Supreme Court cases involving statutory or treaty interpretation relating to Indian nations, this Article demonstrates that the Court has generally been faithful in applying canons relating to treaty interpretation or abrogation. The Court has also respected the canon requiring unequivocal expression of congressional intent before finding an abrogation of tribal sovereign immunity. However, there are two other canons that the …

Ma'ii And Nanaboozhoo Fistfight In Heaven, Tamera Begay, Matthew Fletcher

Articles

In the form of a cute, cuddly, and innocent waabooz, Nanaboozhoo munched on the chewy, bitter Tłohdá’ákáłiitsoh he found everywhere in this⁣ land, far from his own. Although, it was a bit dry. In this land, Dinétah,⁣ Nanaboozhoo thought he could see forever. There were few trees. The sky⁣ was bright blue and limitless. The air smelled like a kind of dirt he had never⁣ experienced. And, boy howdy, was it dry. He couldn’t smell water for the⁣ life of him. But there was water, to be sure, or else there wouldn’t be this⁣ bush.

The Ascension Of Indigenous Cultural Property Law, Angela R. Riley

Michigan Law Review

Indigenous Peoples across the world are calling on nation-states to “decolonize” laws, structures, and institutions that negatively impact them. Though the claims are broad based, there is a growing global emphasis on issues pertaining to Indigenous Peoples’ cultural property and the harms of cultural appropriation, with calls for redress increasingly framed in the language of human rights. Over the last decade, Native people have actively fought to defend their cultural property. The Navajo Nation sued Urban Outfitters to stop the sale of “Navajo panties,” the Quileute Tribe sought to enjoin Nordstrom’s marketing of “Quileute Chokers,” and the descendants of Tasunke …

Cultural Resources, Conquest, And Courts: How State Court Approaches To Statutory Interpretation Diminish Indigenous Cultural Resources Protections In California, Hawai‘I, And Washington, Lauren Ashley Week

Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law

Critical Race Theory identifies two of the United States’ original sins: slavery and conquest; yet, while the former is well known, the latter is simultaneously obvious and unknown, creating a disconnect between the history of violent conquest to the disparities that continue to afflict indigenous communities today. This lack of understanding and acknowledgement also permeates the federal courts—an issue extensively documented by Critical Race Theory and federal Indian law academics. Yet, limited scholarship has interrogated if and how state judicial systems may parallel the failures of federal benches. This Note examines the “hidden,” yet enduring impact of conquest by applying …

Haaland V. Brackeen, Et Al.: Brief Of Indian Law Professors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Federal And Tribal Defendants, Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Appellate Briefs

Amici are professors and scholars of federal Indian law whose scholarship and clinical practice focus on the subject matter areas of Indian law, tribal powers, and federal- and state-court jurisdiction. Amici possess expertise in this area and an interest in ensuring that cases concerning these issues are decided consistently with the text of the United States Constitution, foundational principles in this area of law, and the express intent of Congress. Amici respectfully submit this brief to provide the Court history and context behind the Constitution’s use of Indian status classifications and the inherently political determinations that the legislative and executive …

Haaland V. Brackeen, Et Al.: Brief Of Amici Curiae Administrative Law And Constitutional Law Professors In Support Of Deb Haaland, Secretary Of The Interior, Et Al., And Cherokee Nation, Et Al., Leah Litman, Daniel T. Deacon

Appellate Briefs

Amici curiae are professors of administrative law, constitutional law, and related public law subjects at institutions around the United States. They have extensive experience studying and teaching the text, history, and structure of the Constitution, as well Supreme Court decisions relating to Congress’s legislative powers and the supremacy of federal law. Their legal expertise thus bears directly on the constitutional issues in this case. Amici share an interest in the proper application of constitutional limits on Congress’s authority to enact supreme federal law and state courts’ obligations to decide properly presented federal questions.<\p>

The Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA or …

Lawyering The Indian Child Welfare Act, Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Wenona T. Singel

Michigan Law Review

This Article describes how the statutory structure of child welfare laws enables lawyers and courts to exploit deep-seated stereotypes about American Indian people rooted in systemic racism to undermine the enforcement of the rights of Indian families and tribes. Even when Indian custodians and tribes are able to protect their rights in court, their adversaries use those same advantages on appeal to attack the constitutional validity of the law. The primary goal of this Article is to help expose those structural issues and the ethically troublesome practices of adoption attorneys as the most important Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) case …

The Truth About Property, Jessica A. Shoemaker

Michigan Law Review

A Review of Federal Ground: Governing Property and Violence in the First U.S. Territories. By Gregory Ablavsky.

Preemption, Commandeering, And The Indian Child Welfare Act, Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Randall F. Khalil

Articles

This year (2022), the Supreme Court agreed to review wide-ranging constitutional challenges to the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) brought by the State of Texas and three non-Indian foster families in the October 2022 Term. The Fifth Circuit, sitting en banc, held that certain provisions of ICWA violated the anti-commandeering principle implied in the Tenth Amendment and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.

We argue that the anti-commandeering challenges against ICWA are unfounded because all provisions of ICWA provide a set of legal standards to be applied in states which validly and expressly preempt state …