1994 and This Rights in All Navigable Waters in Assistance Once Again Resulted in Alaska
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
National Indian Law Library NTLL No. D} ~309 J J°104 Noatak v. Blatchford - Accountability & Recognition ALASKA Kotzebue - Tribal Jurisdiction Nome Eskimo Community - Subsistence & Hunting Rights, Taxation Elim v. Alaska - Fishing Rights Gambell v. Babbitt - Subsistence & Aboriginal Land Title State ofAlaska v. Venetie - Taxation NARF ANCHORAGE OFFICE John v. U.S. - Hunting & Fishing Rights, Subsistence Kluti Kaah V. Rosier; Alyeska v. Kluti Kaah - -----------:iii Subsistence & Taxation Fort Peck Tribes - Larsen Bay - Taxation Education (Montana) Chippewa-Cree Tribe - Water Rights (Montana) A-1 (Ft. Civ Skokomish Tribe - Fishing Rights (Washington) Nez Perce Tribe - Water Rights (Idaho) Klamath Tribe - Water Rights & ESSP (Oregon) Fallon Paiute-Shoshone Tribes - Jurisdiction (Nevada) Tule River Tribe - Water Rights (California) Masayesva v. Zah v. James v. San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe - Recognition & Land Claim (Arizona) Fort McDowell Tribe - Water Rights (Arizona) NARFHEADQUARTERS BOULDER, COLORADO Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes v. U.S. - Jurisdiction & Claims (Oklahoma) Mustang v. Cheyenn-Arapaho Tribe - Jurisdiction (Oklahoma) Kauley v. U.S. - Federal Trust Responsibilities (Oklahoma) Pele Defense Fund v. Campbell - Aboriginal Rights (Hawaii) HAWAII Native American Rights Fund "r'5!and/nc; Jrrml Yor i/uslice" 'ontractors v. Strate ~llillla,,6, ;erthold Res.) - Jurisdiction (North Dakota) ~---- Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe - Recognition (Massachusetts) Mashantucket Pequot Tribe -Tribal Court & Constitution (Connecticut) Shinnecock Tribe - Recognition (New York) ...,__ ___ White Earth Chippewa - Land Claim (Minnesota) NARF WASHINGTON, D.C. OFFICE Pamunkey Tribe - Recognition (Virginia) Stockbridge-Munsee Tribe - Claim (Wisconsin) ---- Miami v. Babbitt - Recognition (Indiana) Catawba Tribe - Land Claim (South Carolina) Rosebud Sioux Tribe - Education (South Dakota) Winnebago Tribe - Gas Lease (Nebraska) ------------ NSHS v. Pawnee Tribe v. State - Repatriation (Nebraska) Houma Tribe - Recognition (Louisiana) Alabama Coushatta Tribe v. U.S. - Land Claim (Texas) National Indian Law Llbrarv i 522 Rroadway , Bou:~ ,::;r, CO 80302 PHOTO CREDITS: Thorney Lieberman Tom Thompson Introduction ............................................................................. page 2 Western History Collections, Executive Director's Report.. ................................................... page 3 University of Oklahoma Library Chairperson's Message ............................................................ page 4 Clela Rorex The Board of Directors ............................................................ page 5 The National Support Committee ............................................ page 6 ART CREDITS: The Preservation of Tribal Existence ....................................... page 8 Gus Antone The Protection of Tribal Natural Resources .......................... page 11 Walt Pourier The Promotion of Human Rights ........................................... page 16 The Accountability of Governments ...................................... page 19 Seldon Ridenour The Development of Indian Law ........................................... page 20 Treasurer's Report ................................................................. page 25 Main Office Native American Rights Fund Tax Status 1506 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302 The Native American Rights Fund 303-447-8760 (NARF) is a nonprofit, charitable organization incorporated in 1971 under Washington, D.C. Office the laws of the District of Columbia. Native American Rights Fund NARF is exempt from federal income tax 1712 N Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 under the provisions of Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue code. Contribu 202-785-4166 tions to NARF are tax deductible. The Internal Revenue Service has ruled that Alaska Office NARF is not a "private foundation" as Native American Rights Fund defined in Section 509(a) of the Internal 310 K Street, Suite 708, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Revenue Code. Founded in 1970 and 907-276-0680 incorporated in 1971 in Washington, D.C. 1 As the Native American Rights Fund enters its 25th year of "standing firm for justice," NARF has successfully represented Indian tribes and individuals in nearly ev ery state in the nation. The hundreds of cases it has been involved in have encompassed every area and issue in the field of Indian law. NARF's reputation as a national Indian law advocate is backed by its 24 years of successful legal representation on behalf of Native Americans. A brief review of NARF's origin will give a better understanding of NARF's role in the struggle to protect Native rights in today's society. The Founding of Native American Rights Fund In the 1960's, the federal government and private philanthropists began to ad dress the inability of underserved populations to access legal services. The federal gov ernment funded a network of legal services programs to serve a variety of populations, and it soon became apparent through the work of those programs that there were several population groups among those needing legal services which had unique needs. Native Americans, whose lives have long been governed by the hundreds of treaties, thousands of federal statutes, and numerous regulations and administrative rul ings which make up the specialized body of law known as Federal Indian law, were one such group whose needs demanded a specialized legal practice with a national purview. The Native American Rights Fund was formed in California in 1970 to address the need for a central, national perspective in the practice of Federal Indian law. NARF, then a pilot project, was assisted in its work by the legal academic community and Cali fornia Indian Legal Services. Funding was provided by the Ford Foundation. The need for NARF's services was quickly established, and in 1971, NARF moved its growing staff to Boulder, Colorado, a location more central to Indian country. Since the beginning, the national scope of legal work undertaken by NARF as a non profit organization has been supported by foundation and government grants, corporate, individual, and tribal contributions; and limited client fees. The accomplishments and growth of NARF over the years confirmed the great need for Indian legal representation on a national basis. This legal advocacy on behalf of Native Americans is more crucial now than ever before. NARF strives to protect the most important rights of Indian people within the limit of available resources. To achieve this goal NARF's Board of Directors has defined five priority areas for NARF's work: (1) the preservation of tribal existence; (2) the protection of tribal natural resources; (3) the promotion of human rights; ( 4) the accountability of governments to Native Ameri cans; and (5) the development of Indian law. R 2 The Native American Rights In an important subsistence Fund continued to provide legal fishing rights case, the Alaska advice and representation to Indian federal district court ruled in Katie tribes, organizations and individuals John v. United States that Alaska on issues of major national signifi Natives have subsistence fishing cance in fiscal year 1994 and this rights in all navigable waters in assistance once again resulted in Alaska. The court held also that the several significant legal victories for federal government, not the State of Native Americans. Alaska, has jurisdiction to manage The Cheyenne-Arapaho the subsistence fishing in navigable Tribal Supreme Court upheld the waters. NARF represents two authority of the Cheyenne-Arapaho Athabascan elders, the Mentasta Tribe of Oklahoma to tax oil and Village Council and the Alaska gas activities on lands held in trust Federation of Natives in the case, by the federal government for which has been appealed. would have allowed the states to individual tribal members within the As a leading member of the review the 29 tribally-controlled Tribe's boundaries. NARF is American Indian Religious Free Indian community colleges for defending the Tribe's sovereign dom Coalition and counsel to the eligibility for a student financial aid right to tax against challenges by Native American Church of North program. As a result of negotiations several oil companies subject to the America, NARF played a key role on behalf of the American Indian tax. The oil companies are seeking in the passage of Congressional Higher Education Consortium, the review of the Tribal Supreme Court legislation that exempts the reli Department of Education agreed decision in federal court. gious use of peyote by Indians in that the Indian colleges could not be In A-1 Contractors v. The bona fide traditional ceremonies subjected to state jurisdiction for Honorable William Strate, NARF from controlled substance laws of this review and are arranging for obtained a favorable federal appeals the federal and state governments. federal or tribal governmental court dedsion upholding the civil This act of Congress in effect review. jurisdiction of tribal courts on tribal overturns the 1990 Supreme Court These and many other lands even in a personal injury case decision in Employment Division v. important case developments in involving two non-Indians. The Smith, which denied the protection fiscal year 1994 show that Native court held that the race or political of the free exercise of religion Americans can receive justice if status of the parties did not affect clause of the First Amendment of given the opportunity to be repre the civil jurisdiction of the tribal the Constitution to the