DOCSLIB.ORG

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT of MINNESOTA Mille

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT of MINNESOTA Mille CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 225 Filed 02/01/21 Page 1 of 109 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, a federally recognized Indian Tribe; Sara Rice, in her official capacity as Case No. 17-cv-05155 (SRN/LIB) the Mille Lacs Band Chief of Police; and Derrick Naumann, in his official capacity as Sergeant of the Mille Lacs Police Department, PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF Plaintiffs, LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY v. JUDGMENT THAT THE BOUNDARIES OF THE MILLE County of Mille Lacs, Minnesota; LACS INDIAN RESERVATION, AS Joseph Walsh, individually and in his ESTABLISHED IN 1855, REMAIN official capacity as County Attorney INTACT for Mille Lacs County; and Don Lorge, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Mille Lacs County, Defendants. CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 225 Filed 02/01/21 Page 2 of 109 TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .............................................................................................. iii I. INTRODUCTION. ....................................................................................................... 1 A. Legal Standards. ............................................................................................................ 1 B. Argument Summary. ..................................................................................................... 5 II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND. ..................................................................................... 9 A. The Mille Lacs Reservation. ........................................................................................ 9 B. 1863 and 1864 Treaties. .............................................................................................. 11 C. Timber Trespass and Conflict over the Reservation. .............................................. 16 1. Closure of the Reservation. ................................................................................ 16 2. The Sabin-Wilder Scheme; Chandler and Schurz’s Orders. .......................... 19 3. Little Falls Meeting. ............................................................................................ 21 4. Price’s Report. ..................................................................................................... 23 5. Teller’s Decision. ................................................................................................ 24 6. 1884 Act. .............................................................................................................. 27 7. Northwest Indian Commission. ......................................................................... 28 D. The Nelson Act. ........................................................................................................... 32 1. Legislative History. ............................................................................................. 32 2. Statutory Provisions. ........................................................................................... 34 3. Mille Lacs Negotiations...................................................................................... 35 4. Contemporaneous Reports. ................................................................................ 43 5. Contemporaneous Acts. ...................................................................................... 47 E. Indian Dispossession. .................................................................................................. 47 1. Unlawful Entries. ................................................................................................. 47 2. Noble’s Decisions. .............................................................................................. 50 3. 1893 Resolution. .................................................................................................. 53 4. The Band Resists Removal. ............................................................................... 54 5. Right to Allotments. ............................................................................................ 57 6. 1898 Resolution. .................................................................................................. 60 i CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 225 Filed 02/01/21 Page 3 of 109 7. 1902 Act. .............................................................................................................. 65 F. Non-Removal Mille Lacs Indians. ............................................................................ 71 III. MILLE LAC BAND v. UNITED STATES ................................................................... 75 IV. ARGUMENT. ............................................................................................................ 76 A. The 1863 and 1864 Treaties Preserved the Reservation. ....................................... 76 B. The Nelson Act Preserved the Reservation. ............................................................. 82 1. Nelson Act Cases. ................................................................................................ 82 2. Supreme Court Cases. ......................................................................................... 87 C. The 1893 and 1898 Resolutions Did Not Disestablish the Reservation. .............. 96 D. The 1902 Act Did Not Disestablish the Reservation. ............................................. 98 V. CONCLUSION. ......................................................................................................... 99 ii CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 225 Filed 02/01/21 Page 4 of 109 TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Cases Cathcart v. Minn. & M. R. Co., 133 Minn. 14, 157 N.W. 719 (1916) .................... 6, 84, 91 Chippewa Indians of Minn. v. United States, 301 U.S. 358 (1937) .................................. 97 Choate v. Trapp, 224 U.S. 665 (1912) .............................................................................. 97 Dalberth v. Xerox Corp., 766 F.3d 172 (2d Cir. 2014) ..................................................... 93 DeCoteau v. Dist. Cnty. Court for Tenth Judicial Dist., 420 U.S. 425 (1975) .......... passim Duncan Energy Co. v. Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation, 27 F.3d 1294 (8th Cir. 1994) ................................................................................... 95, 96 Eckelkamp v. Beste, 315 F.3d 863 (8th Cir. 2002) ............................................................ 93 Hagen v. Utah, 510 U.S. 399 (1994) ................................................................. 3, 90, 91, 96 Herrera v. Wyoming, 139 S. Ct. 1686 (2019) ..................................................................... 2 Indian Country, U.S.A., Inc. v. Okla., 829 F.2d 967 (10th Cir. 1987) .............................. 93 Jones v. Meehan, 175 U.S. 1 (1899) .................................................................. 2, 78, 97, 98 Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. Cass County, 108 F.3d 820 (8th Cir. 1997), aff’d in relevant part, 524 U.S. 103 (1998) ......................................... 85 Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. Herbst, 334 F. Supp. 1001 (D. Minn. 1971) ................................................................................................. 82, 83, 84 Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) ............................................................. 35, 76 Mattz v. Arnett, 412 U.S. 481 (1973) ...................................................................... 2, 89, 90 McGirt v. Okla., 140 S. Ct. 2452 (2020) .................................................................... passim Melby v. Grand Portage Band of Chippewa, 1998 WL 1769706 (D. Minn. Aug. 13, 1998) .............................................................................................. 85 Mille Lac Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States, 51 Ct. Cl. 400 (1916) ................. 76 Mille Lac Band of Chippewas v. United States, 47 Ct. Cl. 415 (1912), rev'd in part sub. nom United States v. Mille Lac Band of Chippewa Indians, 229 U.S. 498 (1913) ........................................................................................... 75, 81, 86 Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians v. Minn. Dep’t of Natural Res., 861 F. Supp. 784 (D. Minn. 1994), aff’d, 124 F.3d 904 (8th Cir. 1997), aff’d, 526 U.S. 172 (1999) ............................................................................................. 93 iii CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 225 Filed 02/01/21 Page 5 of 109 Minn. Chippewa Tribe v. United States, 11 Cl. Ct. 221 (1986) ........................................ 81 Minn. v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, 526 U.S. 172 (1999) ......................... 2, 88 Minnesota v. Hitchcock, 185 U.S. 373 (1902) ...................................................... 76, 77, 79 Neb. v. Parker, 136 S. Ct. 1072 (2016) ............................................................... 3, 4, 89, 90 New Town v. United States, 454 F.2d 121 (8th Cir. 1972) ............................................ 1, 79 Oneida Nation v. Vill. of Hobart, 968 F.3d 664 (7th Cir. 2020) ..................................... 1, 4 Pittsburgh & Midway Coal Mining Co. v. Yazzie, 909 F.2d 1387 (10th Cir. 1990) ......... 95 Rosebud Sioux v. Kneip, 430 U.S. 584 (1977) ...................................................... 90, 91, 95 S. D. v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 522 U.S. 329 (1998) .................................................... passim Seymour v. Superintendent of Wash. State Penitentiary, 368 U.S. 351 (1962) ............ 2, 89 Shawnee Tribe v. United States, 423 F.3d 1204 (10th Cir. 2005) ....................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • M-37032 NOV 2 0 2015 To: Secretary
    United States Department of the Interior O FFICE OF T HE SOLICITOR 1849 C STREET N .W. WASHINGTON, DC 2024 0 M-37032 NOV 2 0 2015 To: Secretary From: Solicitor Subject: Opinion on the Boundaries of the Mille Lacs Reservation I. INTRODUCTION This opinion provides my legal conclusion regarding the current status of the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe's (Band) Reservation boundari es. The basis of this opinion is a very in-depth, careful review of the relevant historical documents pertaining to the United States' treatment of the Band's land over the course of more than one hundred years. Sadly, this historical overview reveals that the United States' dealings with the Band were not always a shining example of fa ir and honorable dealings, as it reveals a series of interactions fraught with hidden agendas, arbitrary shifts in policy, utter confusion, and broken commitments. As reflected in the discussion below, on several occasions, the United States was aware of the unauthorized encroachments within the Band's Reservation, but due to external economic and settlement pressures, the government fa il ed to maintain a consistent and clear position on the status of the Band's lands, leading to a gradual , ad hoc opening of the reservation to settlement and development without the requisite, clear Congressional intent to change the boundaries of the Band's Reservation. Although not necessary to the underlying legal determination, thi s opinion honors our modern day values and principles of fairness, transparency, and accountabili ty, and strives to set the record straight and not commit the errors of the past.
    [Show full text]
  • Mille Lacs Tribal P2: Action to Reduce and Eliminate Mercury in Tribal Life of the Misi-Zaaga’Igani Anishinaabeg
    What's Happening in the Arena of Tribal Pollution Prevention? Mille Lacs Tribal P2: Action to Reduce and Eliminate Mercury in Tribal Life of the Misi-zaaga’igani Anishinaabeg Charles J. Lippert, Air Quality Technician Dept. of Natural Resources & Environment Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians May 10, 2006 The Misi-zaaga’igani Anishinaabeg (Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe) Location Size • Two Reservations in East • Total Area: about 64,500 Central Minnesota with Acres scattered off-Reservation • Population: about 3,900 areas, forming eight Tribal members plus family communities stretching from members and employees the Minnesota-Wisconsin who are non-Tribal Indians boarder to the Minnesota- and non-Indians, serving North Dakota Boarder. total population of about 7,000 people. Map – Showing Misi-zaaga’iganiing and Gaa-Mitaawangaagamaag, the eight communities, three districts, one sub-district and the remainder of the 1837 and 1842 Treaty-ceded Territories the Misi-zaaga’igani Anishinaabeg practice traditional hunting, fishing and gathering The Misi-zaaga’igani Anishinaabeg (Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe) Brief History • Mde Wakan (Lake Mille Lacs): Spiritual Centre of the Sioux Nation • Mille Lacs Indians: Union of the Mille Lacs Band of Mdewakanton Sioux and the Mille Lacs Band of Mississippi Chippewa • Treaty of Washington (1855): Establishes 6 Mississippi Chippewa and 3 Pillager Chippewa Reservations (10 Stat., 1165) • Sioux Up rise and Repercussions: Dismantling of the Sioux and Chippewa Nations, but Mille Lacs and Sandy Lake saved • St. Croix
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Affairs Council 2006
    STATE OF tC\t INDIAN AFFAIRS COUNCIL 2006 3801 Bemidji Ave., Suite 5 • Bemidji, MN 56601 • phone: 218.755.3825 • fax: 218.755.3739 • Minnesota Relay Service 1.800.627.3529 161 St. Anthony St., Suite 924 • St. Paul, MN 55103 • phone: 651.296.0041 • fax: 651.296.0309 website: http://www.mniac.org • email: [email protected] Protocols for Working with Tribes 3-4 Council Description and Background Information 5 Vision Statement. 5 Mission 5 Indian Affairs Council -At-Large Membership.............. 5 Board of Directors 6 Executive Board 6 Board Members 6-9 Urban Indian Advisory Council (UIAC) 10 Members 11 Ex-Officios 11 Commissioners 11 Governors Office 12 House 12 Senate 12 MIAC Staff 13 Bemidji Office - Headquarters 13 St. Paul Office - Legislative Program 13 Liaisons 14 Specific Programs 14 Indian Business Loan Program 15 Indian Economic Opportunity Program 15 Activities 15 Cultural Resource Program 15-17 MIAC FY2006 Third Quarter Budget and Expenditure Report 18-19 2005/2006 Legislative Report 21 Policy Issues 22 Liaison Reports 23 Department of Education 23-25 MN Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) 26 MN Department of Health 27-28 MN Department of Human Services 29-30 Minnesota Historical Society 32-33 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency 34 Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mndot) 35 Map of Minnesota Indian Reservation 36 The Dakota Communities 37 Lower Sioux 37 Prairie Island 38 Shakopee Mdewakanton 39 Upper Sioux 40 The Anishinabe Communities .41 . Minnesota Chippewa Tribe (MCT) .41 Elections 41 Membership 42 Bois Forte (Nett Lake) 42 Fond du Lac 43 Minnesota Indian Affairs Council 2006 Annual Report Grand Portage 44-45 Leech Lake 46-47 Mille Lacs 48-50 White Earth 51 Red Lake Nation 52-54 2 Minnesota Indian Affairs Council 2006 Annual Report Minnesota Indian Affairs Council Protocols for Working with Tribes The following list of suggestions is provided to help you develop sound relationships with tribal officials.
    [Show full text]
  • Native People of Western Canada Contents
    Native People of Western Canada Contents 1 The Ojibwa 1 1.1 Ojibwe ................................................. 1 1.1.1 Name ............................................. 1 1.1.2 Language ........................................... 2 1.1.3 History ............................................ 2 1.1.4 Culture ............................................ 4 1.1.5 Bands ............................................. 7 1.1.6 Ojibwe people ......................................... 9 1.1.7 Ojibwe treaties ........................................ 11 1.1.8 Gallery ............................................ 11 1.1.9 See also ............................................ 11 1.1.10 References .......................................... 11 1.1.11 Further reading ........................................ 12 1.1.12 External links ......................................... 13 2 The Cree 14 2.1 Cree .................................................. 14 2.1.1 Sub-groups .......................................... 14 2.1.2 Political organization ..................................... 15 2.1.3 Name ............................................. 15 2.1.4 Language ........................................... 15 2.1.5 Identity and ethnicity ..................................... 16 2.1.6 First Nation communities ................................... 17 2.1.7 Ethnobotany ......................................... 17 2.1.8 Notable leaders ........................................ 17 2.1.9 Other notable people ..................................... 20 2.1.10 See also ...........................................
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Hearing Committee on Natural Resources U.S
    H.R. 1272, MINNESOTA CHIPPEWA TRIBE JUDGMENT FUND DISTRIBUTION ACT OF 2011 LEGISLATIVE HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AND ALASKA NATIVE AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION Thursday, March 1, 2012 Serial No. 112-98 Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov or Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 73-149 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 16:25 Apr 12, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 L:\DOCS\73149.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES DOC HASTINGS, WA, Chairman EDWARD J. MARKEY, MA, Ranking Democratic Member Don Young, AK Dale E. Kildee, MI John J. Duncan, Jr., TN Peter A. DeFazio, OR Louie Gohmert, TX Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, AS Rob Bishop, UT Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA Robert J. Wittman, VA Rush D. Holt, NJ Paul C. Broun, GA Rau´ l M. Grijalva, AZ John Fleming, LA Madeleine Z. Bordallo, GU Mike Coffman, CO Jim Costa, CA Tom McClintock, CA Dan Boren, OK Glenn Thompson, PA Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, CNMI Jeff Denham, CA Martin Heinrich, NM Dan Benishek, MI Ben Ray Luja´n, NM David Rivera, FL John P.
    [Show full text]
  • Tribal Narratives of Community, Sovereignty, and Treaty Rights at the Squaxin Island Museum, Library and Research Center and the Mille Lacs Indian Museum
    To Resist and Adapt: Tribal Narratives of Community, Sovereignty, and Treaty Rights at the Squaxin Island Museum, Library and Research Center and the Mille Lacs Indian Museum A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Karissa Elizabeth White IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Brenda J. Child December 2013 © Karissa Elizabeth White 2013 Acknowledgements I am extremely grateful for many things in my life. I feel very fortunate to have been born an Ojibwe person with loving parents. I am thankful for my brothers and their families (for my “Half-Chunk” nieces and nephews), my son Ozhigaabo, all my relatives at both LCO and Grand Portage, growing up on my reservation at Lac Courte Oreilles in Wisconsin (in both the K-Town and Boulevard communities), attending tribal school where my parents taught; hearing the Anishinaabe language being spoken by elders in my youth; engaging in cultural activities as a child; dancing at powwows, and knowing both my LCO grandma and my Grand Portage granny. My grandma Susie White (Ozhaawaashkoobineshikwe) was fifth degree Midewiwin and my granny Amelia LeGarde taught language and culture for many years in the Duluth Public Schools. I have been inspired by both women’s commitment to their education and I hope to gain the same level of wisdom and knowledge they both possessed when they entered into the spirit world. I am also thankful for the fact that wherever I travel and live, I know I always have a place to call home.
    [Show full text]
  • 241 County Motion for Summary Judgment
    CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 241 Filed 02/01/21 Page 1 of 112 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Court File No. 17-cv-05155 (SRN-LIB) Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, et al., DEFENDANTS’ Plaintiffs, MEMORANDUM OF LAW v. IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT County of Mille Lacs, et al., ON RESERVATION CESSION Defendants. CASE 0:17-cv-05155-SRN-LIB Doc. 241 Filed 02/01/21 Page 2 of 112 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ..................................................................................... V INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1 STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS ................................................................ 2 A. The 1837 Treaty .................................................................................... 4 B. 1855 Treaty creates a reservation ........................................................ 5 C. The Dakota War of 1862 ...................................................................... 6 D. In 1863 the government opens negotiations to consolidate the Chippewa band at a new reservation. ................................................. 9 E. In 1864 Hole-in-the-Day negotiates a new treaty. ............................ 12 F. In 1867 the White Earth Reservation was created. ........................... 12 G. Timber interests and settlers seek to enter the former reservation.......................................................................................... 13 H. The Folsom Decision. .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ojibwe Absent Narratives in Minnesota Forest Park History Elizabeth Steinson St
    St. Cloud State University theRepository at St. Cloud State Culminating Projects in History Department of History 3-2018 Ojibwe Absent Narratives in Minnesota Forest Park History Elizabeth Steinson St. Cloud State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/hist_etds Part of the History Commons Recommended Citation Steinson, Elizabeth, "Ojibwe Absent Narratives in Minnesota Forest Park History" (2018). Culminating Projects in History. 15. https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/hist_etds/15 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of History at theRepository at St. Cloud State. It has been accepted for inclusion in Culminating Projects in History by an authorized administrator of theRepository at St. Cloud State. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ojibwe Absent Narratives in Minnesota Forest Park History by Elizabeth Ley Steinson A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of St. Cloud State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in History March 2018 Committee Members: Robert Galler Jason Eden Robbie Mann 2 Abstract A discursive analysis of Minnesota conservation history, with particular emphasis on the establishment of national forests, follows a recognizable pattern of the benign development of federal and state initiatives to ameliorate environmental despoliation around the turn of the twentieth century. Tensions over the creation of bureaucratic institutions to solve these problems are also generally described in terms of binary struggles between local special interests and conservationists who argued over proper management the land and its resources. Absent from these narratives are the indigenous populations who continued to use these lands and resources and resisted federal and state efforts to impede further loss of their homelands.
    [Show full text]
  • An Ethnographic Study of Indigenous Contributions to the City of Duluth
    An Ethnographic Study of Indigenous Contributions to the City of Duluth Turnstone Historical Research July 2015 THIS PROJECT WAS FUNDED IN PART BY THE ARTS AND CULTURAL HERITAGE FUND Making Indigenous People and their History and Culture Visible in the City of Duluth Throughout the planning of this project and in the current phase of research one major theme was evident, the belief among Indigenous people living in Duluth that their presence and their history have not been visible to the wider population of the city and to visitors. Aside from highly public disputes about the revenues from the Fond du Luth casino, Native people do not believe that their contributions to the city, either in the past or today, have been appreciated. The invisibility of Indigenous people was a prime factor in motivation for the Duluth Indigenous Commission, formerly know as the Duluth American Indian Commission, to undertake this study. The guiding intention was and continues to be the gathering of information on Indigenous people in Duluth, from archival and written sources, oral histories, and archaeological evidence, and the beginning of a discussion of various means to use this information to educate present-day Duluthians about Indigenous history and culture. The current study is described as an "ethnographic study," one which studies both the historical character of Duluth and the cultural influences the region of the city has felt over many hundreds of years. It would be equally accurate to call the study an "ethnographic history," though it is important to note that the goal is not only to study the historic past but the prehistoric one as well through archaeology, and also to try to understand the points of view of Duluth Indigenous residents today and their understandings of their culture and history, through the process of oral interviewing.
    [Show full text]
  • Minnesota V. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa: 19Th Century U.S. Treaty-Guaranteed Usufructuary Property Rights, the Foundation for 21St Century Indigenous Sovereignty
    Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality Volume 33 Issue 1 Article 3 June 2015 Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa: 19th Century U.S. Treaty-Guaranteed Usufructuary Property Rights, the Foundation for 21st Century Indigenous Sovereignty Peter Erlinder Follow this and additional works at: https://lawandinequality.org/ Recommended Citation Peter Erlinder, Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa: 19th Century U.S. Treaty-Guaranteed Usufructuary Property Rights, the Foundation for 21st Century Indigenous Sovereignty, 33(1) LAW & INEQ. 143 (2015). Available at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/lawineq/vol33/iss1/3 Minnesota Journal of Law & Inequality is published by the University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa: 19th Century U.S. Treaty-Guaranteed Usufructuary Property Rights, the Foundation for 2 1 t Century Indigenous Sovereignty Peter Erlindert Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ............................................ 145 I. BACKGROUND TO THE RESTORATION OF CHIPPEWA TREATY- GUARANTEED USUFRUCTUARY PROPERTY RIGHTS IN NORTHERN M INNESOTA ............................................... 151 A. The Late 20'l Century Grassroots Activism: The Rule of Law Returns After 160 Years of Systemic Usufructuary Property Theft ................................. 153 T. Professor of Law (ret.), William Mitchell College of Law, St. Paul, MN 55105; Director, International Humanitarian Law Institute, St. Paul, MN 55101. The Author's research for this Article began on boat launching ramps in Northern Wisconsin in early spring of the 1980s. Legal observers from the Minnesota Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild spent long, cold nights interposed between 1854 Treaty rights activists from the Lac Courte Oreilles Reservation launching canoes for the spring walleye harvest and armed, non-Indian, anti-Treaty protestors threatening violence under the motto, "Save a Fish, Spear an Indian." From these tense, armed stand-offs that, fortunately, did not become violent, came Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v.
    [Show full text]
  • Indian Country Guidance Guidance for Mndot’S Work in Indian Country
    Indian Country Guidance Guidance for MnDOT’s work in Indian country Last revised February 24, 2020 Version 3.0 Tribal Affairs Chief Counsel Levi Brown Lindsey Hanson MnDOT Director of Tribal Affairs MnDOT Associate Legal Counsel Office of Tribal Affairs Office of Chief Counsel (651) 236-7048 (651) 366-3144 Indian Country Guidance – Version 3.0 1 Table of Contents Indian Country Guidance Guidance for MnDOT’s work in Indian country .........................................................1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................4 Technical Guidance (Section I) ........................................................................................................................4 Maps .......................................................................................................................................................................5 How do I know when I’m working in Indian country? ........................................................................................5 Which map do I use? ..........................................................................................................................................5 How do I know for certain that land is tribal land? ............................................................................................5 Which boundaries (federal, state, tribal) do I use? ............................................................................................5
    [Show full text]
  • Native American Nonprofit Economy Report
    Native American Nonprofit Economy Report By Jane Harstad D.Ed A joint project of Native Americans in Philanthropy and the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits. 2 On March 1, 2013, The Minnesota Council of Nonprofits, Native Americans in Philanthropy and Northwest Area Foundation sponsored a public forum held at All Nations Church in Minneapolis for the release of the Native American Nonprofit Economy Report. The report was presented by Jane Harstad, project researcher with MCN and Daniel Lemm, director of programs and finance, Native Americans in Philanthropy. A Community Response Panel was moderated by Laura Waterman Wittstock, president and CEO, Wittstock and Associates, and panel members included Chairwoman Karen Diver, Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa; Suzanne Koepplinger, executive director, Minnesota Indian Women’s Resource Center; Rhiana Yazzie, founder, New Native Theatre; and Bill Ziegler, president/CEO, Little Earth of United Tribes. Introductions and background to the report were provided by Martin Jennings, program officer, and Kevin Walker, President, both of the Northwest Area Foundation. Streaming video of the March 1st report presentation and panel discussion are available online, with links available at the Minnesota Council of Nonprofits and Native Americans in Philanthropy websites: www.minnesotanonprofits.org and www.nativephilanthropy.org/. 3 Table of Contents Overview page 5 Minnesota History and the Parallel Evolution of Organizations Serving Native Americans pages 6 - 7 Tracking Development of Minnesota’s
    [Show full text]