Facebook Twitter Email
THURSDAY, MARCH 27, 2003

The state of Oregon has removed its name from a Supreme Court brief that tribal leaders have criticized as inflammatory.

In a letter to the Supreme Court, Oregon attorney general Hardy Myers withdrew from a brief that was submitted as part of a case testing the state powers over tribal governments. Myers did not elaborate but attorneys familiar with the decision attributed it to an improved sense of cooperation between tribes and the state.

Nine other states still have their names on the brief. In it they say a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion in favor of tribal sovereignty "raises the specter of Indian country becoming a safe haven for criminals."

Oral arguments in Inyo County v. Bishop Paiute Tribe, No. 02-281, will be heard this coming Monday. The Department of Justice has been granted permission to argue on behalf of the Bishop Paiute Tribe of California, whose casino was raided by county law enforcement armed with bolt cutters. Tribal records were seized.

The National Congress of American Indians and the United South and Eastern Tribes also submitted amicus briefs.

Relevant Documents:
Myers Letter to Supreme Court (March 25, 2003)

Briefs:
Bishop Paiute Tribe | Inyo County | New Mexico, Washington, Montana and Arizona | National Congress of American Indians / National Indian Gaming Association / Tribes | United States | State Attorney Generals | National Sheriff's Association | Los Angeles County

Decision Below:
BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE v. COUNTY OF INYO No. 01-15007 (January 4, 2002)

Relevant Documents:
Docket Sheet: No. 02-281 | Senate Testimony: Monty Bengochia on Supreme Court Precedents

Related Stories:
Tribes enter Supreme Court case (2/25)
Inouye ties sovereignty to homeland security (2/25)
Showdown looms in tribal sovereignty case (02/20)
S.D. tribe to accept state subpoenas (2/19)
S.D. puts pressure on tribal sovereignty (2/12)
Supreme Court work at issue as judge debated (01/30)
State power over tribal government in dispute (12/03)