Post by blackcrowheart on Mar 20, 2006 16:38:59 GMT -5
PECHANGA: They aim to clarify whether the state can intervene in civil suits between Indians.
A group of former Pechanga members have taken their fight against removal from the tribe to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Attorneys representing some of the 135 disenrolled members filed a petition Thursday seeking a hearing before the nation's high court.
The petition asks whether California law allows state courts to hear civil suits between Indians on issues that arise in Indian Country.
Courts have been reluctant to intervene in such matters, ruling they are best left to tribal councils. The law isn't clear, attorneys for the disenrolled members say.
"This issue raises an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court," the petition states.
It seeks clarification of whether state courts can intervene in tribal matters. It also asks for resolution of what the petitioners see as a conflict between state and federal court rulings regarding tribal sovereign immunity.
In the case being presented, a Riverside County Superior Court judge ruled that state courts have jurisdiction in such cases. That ruling was overturned by the 4th District Court of Appeal, Division Two.
Judges from the Riverside-based appellate court ruled that tribal sovereignty -- the right to self-governance -- trumped the claims that the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians failed to follow their own rules for the disenrollment procedure.
Attorneys for the tribe argued successfully that the Pechanga rules were followed, and tribal procedures do not have to match those of state or local governments to be valid.
The Pechanga tribe operates a popular resort casino near Temecula.
The lawsuit by the disenrolled members claimed ouster from the tribe resulted in losses of about $120,000 each in yearly casino profit shares, along with other benefits such as health insurance.
The suit names individuals on the tribe's membership committee, rather than the tribal government itself.
Attorney Brian Unitt, the Riverside attorney representing the disenrolled members, said Thursday that he hopes to hear by the end of June whether the U.S. Supreme Court will take the case for its next session.
Oklahoma attorney Jonathan Velie, who represents Indians across the nation in several tribal enrollment cases, is also on the petition.
<http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_H_pechanga17.1d470645.html>
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
A group of former Pechanga members have taken their fight against removal from the tribe to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Attorneys representing some of the 135 disenrolled members filed a petition Thursday seeking a hearing before the nation's high court.
The petition asks whether California law allows state courts to hear civil suits between Indians on issues that arise in Indian Country.
Courts have been reluctant to intervene in such matters, ruling they are best left to tribal councils. The law isn't clear, attorneys for the disenrolled members say.
"This issue raises an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court," the petition states.
It seeks clarification of whether state courts can intervene in tribal matters. It also asks for resolution of what the petitioners see as a conflict between state and federal court rulings regarding tribal sovereign immunity.
In the case being presented, a Riverside County Superior Court judge ruled that state courts have jurisdiction in such cases. That ruling was overturned by the 4th District Court of Appeal, Division Two.
Judges from the Riverside-based appellate court ruled that tribal sovereignty -- the right to self-governance -- trumped the claims that the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians failed to follow their own rules for the disenrollment procedure.
Attorneys for the tribe argued successfully that the Pechanga rules were followed, and tribal procedures do not have to match those of state or local governments to be valid.
The Pechanga tribe operates a popular resort casino near Temecula.
The lawsuit by the disenrolled members claimed ouster from the tribe resulted in losses of about $120,000 each in yearly casino profit shares, along with other benefits such as health insurance.
The suit names individuals on the tribe's membership committee, rather than the tribal government itself.
Attorney Brian Unitt, the Riverside attorney representing the disenrolled members, said Thursday that he hopes to hear by the end of June whether the U.S. Supreme Court will take the case for its next session.
Oklahoma attorney Jonathan Velie, who represents Indians across the nation in several tribal enrollment cases, is also on the petition.
<http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_H_pechanga17.1d470645.html>
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only.