Header

BIA Should Not Be Allowed to Make Enrollment Decisions for Tribes

Sherry Treppa
1/15/14

All Native Americans should be deeply concerned about a recent federal court decision ordering the BIA to decide who can be a member of one California tribe and how the tribal government should be organized – all for the sake of protecting “potential” tribal members instead of the will of the tribe. Prior to the December 13 order by the D.C. District Court, in California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Jewell, No. 11-CV-00160 (D.D.C.), the BIA respected the sovereign right of each tribe to establish its own enrollment procedures and determine their form of government. This all changed when the court stated the BIA has a trust responsibility to non-tribal members seeking membership and ordered the BIA to consider a tribal government’s motivation in prior and future enrollment decisions. This decision is paternalism at its worst and flies in the face of everything it means to be a Sovereign Indian tribe.

The decision stems from a leadership dispute with the California Valley Miwok Tribe. In 1998, the five members of the Tribe organized as a general council to govern the tribe and established a constitution and membership roll for the tribe. The BIA recognized the tribe under this government in 1998. The BIA then recognized the five-member general council again in 2011 after over a decade of trying to intervene while the tribe resisted the BIA’s groundless efforts to impose its will on the tribe. Now dozens of non-tribal members along with one of the original five members of the tribe’s general council seek to change the tribe’s enrollment criteria and government structure. Under the recent court decision, the BIA will uphold the will of these non-tribal members over the majority of the tribe’s general council.

The court is ordering the BIA to impose the will of non-tribal members on the tribe by forcing the BIA to consider whether “potential” members should be entitled to membership. This should concern every member of the 566 federally recognized tribes in the United States because now the BIA is compelled to determine the legitimacy of each tribe’s enrollment decisions.

The natural next step, which demonstrates the absurdity of the D.C. court’s decision, is what criteria the BIA will use to decide whether “potential” members are entitled to the benefits of tribal membership. No matter what criteria the BIA decides to arbitrarily apply, tribes are left with a harsh reality that sounds more like 1814 than 2014 – the federal government taking it upon itself to decide what is in the best interest of Indian tribes.

But the consequences are not just limited to enrollment decisions. The court decision also requires the BIA to eliminate the entire tribal government if it finds that the government was not formed with the consensus of all “potential” members. So now not only does the federal government get to determine if “potential” tribal members are entitled to enrollment, but the federal government would also consider whether the tribal government structure is in the best interests of these “potential” members. The consequences of “potential” members determining the legitimacy of tribal governments calls into question all of the actions taken by all tribal governments no matter how long those governments have existed. 

The court’s decision will have disastrous consequences far beyond California’s central valley and the small California Valley Miwok Tribe. As Native Americans, our sovereignty and right to establish the laws we live by is what make Indian tribes distinctive. We must not stand by while a federal court unravels decades of progress toward “self” determination and needlessly destroys our inalienable right to Sovereignty so carelessly in the name of “potential” tribal members. Therefore, I urge all tribes to become involved (through the filing of a brief with the appeals court or otherwise) and have your voice heard in this matter that will impact your internal governance in a disastrous way. If history has taught us anything, it is that each of us (Tribes) are the only ones that we can count on to look out for our tribe’s best interest. Hopefully it is not already too late.

Sherry Treppa is the chairperson for the Habematolel Pomo Of Upper Lake.

You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page

14

POST A COMMENT

Comments

ypochris's picture
Although the author is correct in stating that the BIA should not be allowed to make enrollment decisions for tribes, this particular case is substantially different than what is represented. In this case, a single person was assumed, contrary to all evidence, to be the only member of a tribe that in fact consisted of about 250 individuals. This individual, apparently out of sympathy, enrolled a member of another tribe (who had been dis-enrolled, for reasons unknown, from her tribe) and her children and grandchild. The court ruled that there was no basis for deciding that the single individual was the only member of the tribe, and that a tribal government based on that assumption was invalid. In 2007, in response to notices in local newspapers, the BIA received genealogies from at least 242 individuals indicating that they were members of the tribe. The court very properly determined that a tribal government based on the assumption that there was only a single member, when in fact there were at least 242 members of the tribe, was not a legally constituted government of the tribe, and thus had no authority to determine who was, and who was not, a member of that tribe. I do not see any impact of this decision (that the supposed tribal government was invalid) on the enrollment (or other) decisions made by tribal governments that are, in fact, legitimately chosen by the majority of the members of a tribe.
ypochris
lmann's picture
I agree with 'ypochris'. Each case is different. Sadly some tribal governments have been unfair, politically and financially motivated by membership. Nothing to do with blood quantum. It begs the question of what's worse the egregious behavior of some councils or the BIA? sovereignty? Remember the Natives who get the boot have rights too. Are they not still sovereign? Who speaks for them? Or does sovereignty have to be government approved? In this day and age where some tribal governments are systematically removing Indians from their rolls is more disturbing than this BIA decision. Taking away, or interfering with a legitimate Native persons right to exists is far more troubling.
lmann
tigercat's picture
whomever "ypochris" is, what they posted is not true but the fabrication of Chadd Everone and his casino developer Albert Seeno Jr. and was argued on their behalf by Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton. Sherry Treppa is a well known and respected chairperson and knows the dangerous precedent that this decision will have in Indian country if allowed to stand. This tribe was never terminated and only had one recognized member whom was listed as a spokesman for the tribe beings the tribe never officially organized. Mr. Everone has managed to now collect signatures of some 250 individuals after failing previously with two other groups. This is the third tribe he has put together in an attempt to acquire through any means this tribe for the purpose of building a bay area casino. No current tribal members have ever had enrollment in any other tribe that is another falsehood. The judges decision directly contradicts two well briefed final agency actions and Santa Clara Pueblo vs Martinez. The tribe was officially organized with all adult members in attendance and with BIA officials Brian Golding Jr. and Raymond Fry assisting. The tribe organized under a resolution form of government and held supervised elections. There are many tribes in the Sierra foothills and anyone can say they are from a number of those tribes, but we Native Americans know that as tribal people we in our own tribes through our enrollment processes decide whom meets our criteria and only upon enrollment do individuals become members. These people were nowhere to be found until after the gaming initiative passed then they came out of the woodwork claiming rights to membership, but never once asking the actual tribe for an enrollment application. This tribe only had two recognized spokespersons in its entire history and only first organized in 1998 under resolution GC-98-01. Many tribes have been correcting their tribal roles. These individuals have never been on the California Valley Miwok membership roles. What Chairperson Treppa is warning about is that if the BIA is given overall authority to decide this organized tribes membership and government then every tribe that values its sovereignty should be very afraid. To see the actual tribe their site is www.californiavalleymiwoktribe-nsn.gov or visit californiavalleymiwoktribe.us and listen to the Everone/Ludwig audio archive and hear what he told a private investigator when he was being recorded. This is all about getting a California Indian casino to offset the hit Albert Seeno Jr. and the Peppermill chain are taking in Nevada no matter whom's rights they have to violate.
tigercat
ypochris's picture
About gambling interests, I know nothing. When I left Central California in 1976, "Indian Gambling" meant a night in the roundhouse at the Bear Dance. However, knowing the nature of human greed, it would not surprise me if at heart, this were a case that resolves around money. The cost of hiring attorneys certainly indicates that money is at stake. However, this particular case is not, on the face of it, about gambling but rather a question about who was the legitimate representative of the tribe, which led, in the end, to the question of whether the tribal government had been properly formed. It began with the question of whether Yakima or Burley represented the tribe, and even if Burley was a legitimate member. The case cited in this article ( California Valley Miwok Tribe v. Jewell) states that "It appears that at one time Burley had been a member of the Jackson Rancheria, a community near the Sheep Ranch Rancheria, but by 1998 was no longer a member. AR 000250, 001096. The reason for her disenrollment is not clear from the record." Further, it is suggested that Burley was just taking advantage of Yakima - " the August 2011 Decision does not explain why the BIA was not required, pursuant to its "unique trust relationship" with Indian tribes, to ensure that Burley was not taking advantage of Yakima when she sought membership for her family.This Court notes that at the time that Burley first contacted Yakima, he was in jail and suffering from several serious illnesses and other disabilities. See, e.g., AR 000082, AR 000464. Yet, the BIA acknowledges that it made no effort to determine what criteria Yakima used in determining the Burleys' eligibility. Indeed, Yakima claims that "his intent [in enrolling Burley's family in the Tribe] was only to grant such membership rights necessary to qualify [Burley's family] for services offered by [BIA] to members of federally recognized tribes," thereby suggesting that he enrolled her out of sympathy rather than based on any eligibility criteria." But the bottom line is that the court determined that a tribal government based on the assumption that there was only one member of the tribe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, was not a legitimately formed government: "This Court finds that the Assistant Secretary's conclusion that the citizenship of the Tribe consists solely of Yakima, Burley, Burley's two daughters, and Burley's granddaughter is unreasonable in light of the administrative record in this case. The Assistant Secretary rests his conclusion on principles of tribal sovereignty, but ignores—entirely—that the record is replete with evidence that the Tribe's membership is potentially significantly larger than just these five individuals. For instance, from at least as early as 1997, the BIA recognized that the Tribe consisted of a "loosely knit community of Indians in Calaveras County," AR 000507, and at various times over the last twelve years, the BIA claimed that the Tribe consisted of at least 250 individuals. See, e.g., AR 000510, AR 000827. The BIA received genealogies from at least 242 individuals in response to the notice it placed in the newspapers in 2007. AR XXXXXX-XXX. Even Burley at one time represented to a federal district court that the Tribe consists of at least 250 individuals." At least as troubling is the fact that Yakima's brother, Melvin, was conveniently ignored as he could not be located at the time: "Nor does the August 2011 Decision explain why the BIA did not have a duty to protect Yakima's brother Melvin. In September 1998, the BIA acknowledged that Melvin was a member of the Tribe. AR 000172-176. However, Melvin was not consulted by Yakima before Yakima enrolled Burley's family into the Tribe. The August 2011 Decision does not address why the BIA did not have a duty to ensure that Melvin's interests were protected before accepting the Burleys' enrollment into the Tribe (by admitting the four Burley family members, Yakima effectively placed Melvin's tribal rights at the mercy of the Burleys). The court determined that the government of the tribe had been improperly formed, and so any question regarding who was properly the representative of the tribe was moot. There was much discussion of potentially interfering with tribal sovereignty. The bottom line for the court was: "In the Federal Defendant's (The BIA's) current view of this case, once a Tribe announces a government, the BIA is prohibited from ever questioning the legitimacy of the government no matter how many allegations of fraud are raised." In other words, if the government was improperly formed in the first place, it is not legitimate. All the players must start again from square one. That is not such a bad outcome, as it gives all parties the opportunity to present their case.
ypochris
tigercat's picture
I am now led to believe, that "ypochris" is in fact a Sheppard/Mullin/Richter & Hampton attorney, due to his exact citing of their arguments and not actual facts. He talks of Indian gaming in the "roundhouse". To Miwoks, the roundhouse is sacred and only for ceremonies, healing and dancing. Gambling is never allowed. Of course, being a non-native, he would not know that. Again, these attorneys do not like that their client, Albert Seeno, Jr., and the Peppermill casino chain are mentioned and exposed. This individual will continue to say this is not about gaming, putting on his smoke and mirrors show. Everyone is well aware of who Chairperson Burley is and she is acknowledged by the White House, the Governor, NCAI, TANF, CATG, NIHB, NAGPRA and NICWA; just to name a few. In fact, Yakima Dixie admitted in a videotaped court deposition in 2011, that he did resign in 1998, and that Silvia Burley is the tribal leader. Also to dispel the continued lie of her previous enrollment in the Jackson Rancheria, the Tribe will ask its Chairman, Adam Dalton, for a future statement that will be posted on the Tribal sites, if not also here in this format. Chairperson Burley never took advantage of Mr. Dixie. He in fact wanted to enroll her and the other members under his then authority as Tribal Spokesman. When Chairperson Burley contacted Mr. Dixie, it was at his residence and he was in good health; not sick and in jail as "ypochris" states. The BIA knew that Yakima and Silvia were cousins and of her lineage to the Tribe. As the only member and spokesperson of the tribe at that instant, Mr. Dixie held all power necessary to enroll individuals. The BIA came to Yakima with Silvia present and explained what enrollment with full rights meant and Mr. Dixie said that he understood and that was his intent. There is a film in the Tribe's possession of this historic meeting with BIA officials. Again, "ypochris" tries to belie the truth about more members than Yakima existed at this time, but one has to but look at the Tribe's history and it is shown for decades population "one" for the California Valley Miwok Tribe, formally known as the Sheep Ranch Rancheria. That administrative record also shows this. The Assistant Secretary made the final agency actions based upon all facts of the Tribe's history and the government never included all Indians living within Calaveras County as members. There were the Six Mile Camp, Calaveras County Mi-Wuks, Calaveras County Mountain Miwoks and other small bands that also existed as distinct and separate entities. "Ypochris" also states many genealogies were received by the BIA upon notice placed by them in newspaper ads. This was a totally illegal function performed by the local BIA Superintendent as the BIA has no authority to enroll members into a tribe. They also have no authority to re-enroll individuals whom had their previous memberships terminated in any tribe. Again, "ypochris" misstates actual fact. Chairperson Burley actually said there could be as many as 250 individuals who could "apply" for membership within the Motherlode. This was a roundabout figure that even encompassed other regional tribes and was done at the request of Willie Pink, a previous consultant, when earlier in the Tribe's history, he advised the Tribe to increase their service area. Soon after this, Mr. Pink was terminated and the statement was never again made. Yakima's brother Melvin was not ignored at the meeting with BIA officials Brian Golding and Ray Fry. Yakima Dixie stated that he thought Melvin Dixie was dead, as he had no contact with him for the past 25 years. In 1998, the BIA only acknowledged five members and that is all they continue to acknowledge in official documents and court actions to this day. Melvin Dixie only appeared many years later and the BIA asked that the Tribe "consider" his enrollment, but Melvin Dixie never came to the Tribe seeking membership. Again, "ypochris" gets it wrong. The BIA had no responsibility to protect Melvin's rights, as even his own brother Yakima thought that he no longer lived. An initial extensive search never turned up his whereabouts. "Ypochris" finally gets it right and a federal judge gets it wrong. Judge Rothstein manipulated and showing bias, basically sent everything back to the BIA and one can only interpret in her wording that she expects the BIA to create a tribal government and control enrollment for the California Valley Miwok Tribe. The BIA has no legal authority to do either, especially with an existing government and membership. If a precedent were to be set here, it would cut out the heart of the very meaning of sovereignty, and all tribes would then be susceptible to government interference, taking away any tribe ever again having independent control of their own destinies. What the Sheppard/Mullin/Richter & Hampton attorney going by the username "ypochris" is trying to stop and is afraid of, is that their attempted theft of this tribe can only happen at the expense of sovereignty for all American tribes. He knows full well we tribes will band together to protect our sovereignty. As an attorney, he is very afraid of the filing of future Amicus briefs by sister tribes of the California Valley Miwok Tribe, because standing with this tribe today will save everyone's sovereignty tomorrow. In the end, to believe "ypochris" is to ignore an actual well respected Native American Chairperson "Sherry Treppa" and to pay no heed to her warning.
tigercat
ypochris's picture
While it is flattering that Tigercat would take me for an attorney, which was once a dream of mine, I'm afraid I am not. And although the Miwoks may consider the roundhouse too sacred for the handgame, the Bear Dance is a Maidu ceremony, we were friends of Gladys who always came to help set up a week or two before and so I spent many a night watching and, later, playing handgame there. Maybe my memory is fuzzy after forty years and it wasn't in the roundhouse itself, but that is the way I remember it. Frankly, I was more interested in chasing the bear, and not getting attacked by her nasty geese, most of the years I was there. It wasn't until later that making acorn soup and playing handgame became important. Still, it seemed to me that the quest for power and the handgame itself was a deep part of Maidu spirituality, not some profane act that had to be pushed out to the margins. But I am not here to argue my "Indianness", which I addressed in my first post on the site. Mostly what I returned to say is that Tigercat errs when s/he claims ypochris says this and ypochris lies about that. Because everything Tigercat contests is not something I said, but rather a direct quote from the court's decision. That is what the quotation marks are there for. It would have been more clear if the original formatting had been retained in the post, but this site removes all spacing, which is useful for setting apart quotes and separating paragraphs to make the thoughts more clear. It is the judge, not ypochris, who said those things. And what the judge writes in the decision is based in evidence presented in court, where both sides have full opportunity to contest evidence as it is presented. Having been through the court process, I am confident that anything the judge wrote in the decision was proven to be factual. I cannot say the same for what Tigercat has said, although as I stated I am willing to believe, based on the high cost of such cases, that a significant amount of money is involved in this issue. I did wonder how Burley can afford all this. I do concede that my opinion that this will have little effect on established tribal governments is just that, my opinion. Ms. Treppa may well be correct that the implications go far beyond what they appear to be. One thing is clear - Tigercat knows more about this case than I do, as I only know what I have read and Tigercat seems to be intimately involved. But arguing the facts that came out of the court case after they have been proven in court does not, to me, help make Tigercat's case - quite the contrary, in fact. I'd suggest that anyone concerned with this decision read the case cited in the article and draw their own conclusions.
ypochris
tigercat's picture
Being as "ypochris" is such a well of misinformation and does not feel the need to be quieted, I shall again correct the record. "Ypochris" to your first statement, do not feel flattered that I take you for a Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton attorney. They are parasites whom just recently have decided to invade the body of Indian Law through deceit, misinformation and flim-flammery. Also, we were talking about Miwoks, not Maidu, so please, if you are unknowledgable, do not disrespect their culture too. Also, the Miwok have a bear's dance that is in their custom and tradition, as I know the individual whom led the dance in the last ceremony at Yosemite. I also never said games of custom and tradition were "profane", as you put it, but not being Native American yourself, how could you comprehend the sanctity of Native American spiritualism. "Indianness"? Of course you are not American Indian, otherwise you would not use derogatory terms like this, used by some to describe us. I wholly disagree with how you presented your opinion, citing exactly what Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton submitted in their filings and then believing that a federal judge is infallible and acting like an authority on the subject to stress that Chairwoman Sherry Treppa got it wrong. You are a non-native and now you would have us believe a non-attorney. That makes you the last person whom should try to make an argument against what an American Indian Tribal leader can see as a direct and invasive threat, not only to the California Valley Miwok Tribe, but also to her tribe and the whole of Indian Country. You also state you have been through the court "process". Now really, are you an attorney? "Burley" as you put it, again shows your ignorance of the legal plight of this Tribe and of its filings. The Tribe is always named in all of the filings of which Silvia Burley is the Chairperson. The ones being represented as individuals are in the filings of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, being as they are not the Tribe, they are always listed individually in their pleadings. Also, in the question of payment for the tribal attorneys, the attorneys for the Tribe are from an independent, Native American law firm whom have worked without any compensation whatsoever since 2009, when they became aware of just how far some would commit nefarious acts to violate well-established Indian Law in an effort to steal this Tribe from its people and eradicate its governmental organization, that well-known, was established with assistance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs under GC-98-01. I would question though, how the other side represented by Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton are able to pay their attorneys. Almost all of these individuals are on welfare, disability or some kind of other public assistance or subsidies, when not in county jail or state prison. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton have offices throughout the United States, Europe and Asia; but the latest net worth estimate of their casino mogul developer, A.D. Seeno, Jr., was just north of 11 billion dollars, so I guess they're just chump change. Finally, "ypochris" gets it right. I do know more of the details and yet-to-be brought forth evidence and am much more of an expert in this matter than "ypochris", even if it eventually becomes evident that "ypochris" is an attorney. At the end of the post, the only reason to look at the judge's decision is for tribes to stand together and submit Amicus briefs, because an appeal has already been filed. "Ypochris" if you indeed are not Native American or an Indian Law attorney and the jest of your expertise is the reading of but one flawed ruling from a federal judge, then maybe you should not give an opinion as if you were some kind of expert. It is the continued interference by unknowledgable individuals such as yourself dabbling with our customs and laws that is the most disparaging to true Native Americans. If you actually knew the law in this matter, you would know that the judge is trying to empower the BIA to do what is not within their legal authority to do, besides as earlier stated, this decision is now on appeal. So, if overturned, will you then come back if that ruling is posted and support it, saying the original decision was wrong?
tigercat
Disenrolled tribal allotee's picture
Allowing sketchy Tribal officials to pick the membership of the tribe without oversight is an invitation to corruption. Unfortunately Tribal Leaders who are willing to act as organ grinder monkeys for gambling interests and hucksters are allowing others to muscle in on indian gaming and grab our land, water rights and other tribal resources. Corrupt tribal leaders, who are sometimes non Indians themselves, are selling our native American Heritage for literally peanuts to organized crime. The use of outside records to verify that tribal membership decisions are not corrupted by bribery, fraud and intimidation is a reasonable safeguard for maintaining the integrity of tribal governments and preserving our heritage.
Disenrolled tri...
ypochris's picture
No, I'm not easily quieted. Yes, I am not an attorney. Yes, I am part Indian and was raised often in the company of Maidu elders. Yes, I left California many years ago, and keep abreast through what I read, so my opinions may be biased by what has been published and testified to as opposed to what I might have head, having head nothing. No, I am not disrespecting Sherry Treppa's opinion, beyond stating that to me it does not appear that this will affect long-standing tribal governments, while admitting that I could be wrong. As for "misinformation", the only facts I have stated regarding the ruling are direct quotes from the judge's decision. If there is other evidence showing this to be misinformation, it should have been presented at trial, not saved for an appeal. It is unlikely that a judge will find withheld evidence admissible, unless it came to light after the trial, so sadly if what tigercat says is true it may not matter. If I choose to value a judge's opinion over tigercat's, it is simply that the judge had all the facts presented by both sides as well as whatever actual evidence was available, knowing the decision was subject to judicial review, while tigercat is simply an anonymous person blogging on the internet. And the only reason I went beyond my initial statement that, to me, it appeared this ruling would have little significance for established tribal governments was because tigercat went beyond addressing the facts of the case and attacked me, personally, with untruths to which I felt compelled to respond. If I offended Ms. Treppa in the way I expressed my differing opinion, I am sincerely apologetic. But if I offended tigercat by passing on information presented in court under oath, and responding very politely to insinuations, it bothers me not, because I, too, am very offended by tigercat's personal attacks in a forum where we should be discussing the message, not the messenger.
ypochris
tigercat's picture
"Ypochris", actually I am glad that you have not quieted and you have a compulsive responsive disorder and that you came back. You are actually helping the Tribe. Currently, other federally recognized tribes are inquiring into what is being done to this tribe and setting up meetings with the California Valley Miwok Tribal Chairperson, Silvia Burley. Whatever your agenda, you are having the opposite effect. Thank you for keeping this issue current. For someone whom says that this is just something they read, it sure seems like you have an agenda. Its like you are a Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton attorney, but probably you are just Chadd Everone himself, the orchestrator of fraud. Chadd has a problem shutting up and thinks himself quite smart and fancied himself an amateur attorney too. He was exposed as a fraud in his court deposition, when it was revealed that he does not actually have a Ph.d., as he always lists after his name. I would think by now with all of your errors, that no one believes you to be of indigenous descent. You are not Native American. Just because you watch a movie, go to Big Times or stayed at a Holiday Inn last night, does not make you one. Again, why is this case so seemingly important to someone whom does not get involved in any other Indigenous issues, unless in fact, you have been lying "Chadd". Native American tribal governments know that federal judges are constantly trying to create inroads into Indian Sovereignty, so constantly quoting a flawed decision is not convincing anyone. Tribes know all too well, if a precedent is established, even if not immediately used universally, can be resurrected and used against any tribe at any time, when in conflict with the federal government. Its like taxes. Once established, here forever. I myself have never seen a so-called "temporary tax" go away. Once the government has a power, they never relinquish it and history shows they will always end up using it again. That is why there is and always will be a never ending caseload of legal cases in which tribes must defend sovereign issues within Indian Country. You now say "It does not appear that this decision will affect long-standing governments" but you admit you could be wrong. In your first posting, you substantially said this case is different and led readers to believe that this decision would only hurt the recognized tribal government of the California Valley Miwok Tribe. So again, the reason I reply is not to attack you, but to correct and expose you, which I would not have to do if you would just cite the judge's decision without supporting and putting your personal opinion as to its validity, especially when your personal logic flies in the face of one of our well-known and respected tribal leaders. Again, you are a well of misinformation. There is an appeal already filed in this case and there are questions and evidence within this appeal as to why this judge accepted certain representations without verifying evidence and why she ignored some of the facts that have been long established within the official record. The only thing this judge did is to make sure that this tribe stays in litigation for years to come. Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton attorneys made this threat to Rob Rosette years ago, as did Chadd Everone to the Tribe's members. So this is neither unexpected or a surprise. In the end, I did not attack you; I corrected you. When you represent that courts can do no injustice, "all real Native Americans would disagree" and that you know more than one of our own tribal leaders. Then you insult our culture and spirituality with comments of gambling in our "Round House", then you add your personal opinions about the Final Agency Actions in favor of the Tribe. So now, you would have us believe not only do you know more in this matter, than Chairperson Sherry Treppa, but you know more than Assistant Secretary Larry Echo Hawk and his entire staff, in the endless hours of factual research and multiple filings by all parties in which he based his Final Agency decisions upon. You also tried to question the ethics of true Native American tribal attorneys from Rosette, LLC, whom have worked tirelessly on the Tribe's behalf since 2009, receiving no compensation whatsoever. This is just a small example of the fallacies where you have tried to create fact from through the use of innuendos, so please do not confuse correcting you or even schooling you with attacking you. To continue to enlighten readers with a few more facts, please go to http://californiavalleymiwoktribe.us. They have now posted at the top of the page from court depositions, Chadd Everone being exposed as a fraud and Yakima Dixie admitting that he resigned as chairperson in 1999. Mr. Dixie coerced by Mr. Everone to fraudulently claim to be chairperson is what has kept the Tribe in state and federal litigation for the past decade. Financed by A.D. Seeno, Jr., with an illegal contract to pay Mr. Dixie upon eliminating Silvia Burley as Chairperson and litigated by corporate attorneys, Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton and paid for by A.D. "Deep Pockets" Seeno, Jr., himself. While on the site, click the "Everone/Ludwig Audio Archive" to hear what Chadd Everone really thinks of us Native Americans and of his criminal confessions as recorded by a tribal private investigator. Also, be sure to click the "Everone/Ludwig & the DOI", to see the criminal activity exposed and to view the actual contract to interfere with the Tribe's leadership, signed by A.D. Seeno, Jr. In closing, I want to thank all of the Native Americans whom have started to come forward on this matter and to Indian Country Today, whom first posted this story that is ever-gaining more exposure throughout all of Indian Country.
tigercat

Pages