ORAL ARGUMENTS BEGIN IN JURISDICTION DISPUTE BETWEEN WHITE EARTH NATION Vs. MINNESOTA DNR TO BE HEARD THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16 BY 8TH CIRCUIT COURT AROUND 10 A.M. CST
Remote Media and Public Access Available via Audio Stream
ORAL ARGUMENTS BEGIN IN JURISDICTION DISPUTE BETWEEN WHITE EARTH NATION Vs. MINNESOTA DNR TO BE HEARD THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16 BY 8TH CIRCUIT COURT AROUND 10 A.M. CST
WHO
Oral arguments in Case 21-3050 will begin tomorrow, December 16, 2021, by the 8th Circuit Court in St. Paul in a dispute about whether White Earth Nation tribal jurisdiction in northern Minnesota binds the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to fight a novel Rights of Manoomin lawsuit in state or tribal court (See WHAT).
White Earth Tribal Judge DeGroat and Red Lake tribal attorney, Joe Plumer, will present the tribe’s arguments on behalf of White Earth.
WHAT
At issue ultimately is whether the DNR can be sued by the White Earth Nation in tribal court over the Rights of Manoomin (wild rice) – often identified as Rights of Nature, challenging the Line 3 DNR water/dewatering permits that allocated 5 billion gallons of water during pipeline construction in an historic, severe drought last summer.
The DNR has challenged whether tribal courts have the authority to hear such a case.
WHERE / WHEN
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 16 – approximately 10:00—10:30 a.m. CST
The media and public can access the live audio stream provided on the court’s website at www.ca8.uscourts.gov.
The court also provides digital audio recordings of all arguments under the “Oral Arguments” tab on its website. These recordings are posted shortly after completion of the day’s argument sessions.
WHY IS THE HEARING IMPORTANT?
A decision by the 8th Circuit Court will determine whether White Earth Tribal Court can exercise environmental protection jurisdiction off reservation over the DNR. A favorable decision enables a standing lawsuit about the Rights of Manoomin (wild rice) vs the DNR to be heard in tribal court.
The Anishinaabe tribes, including White Earth, hold Manoomin as a sacred and essential cultural entity worthy of protecting legally, and codified that protection through a tribal law passed in late in 2018.
For more insights into what may prove to be a precedent-setting case, see: “The First Rights of Nature Case Goes to Tribal Court: The Case for Manoomin” on YouTube during a recent December 7 webinar that Tribal attorney Frank Bibeau did with the Center for Democratic Environmental Rights:
AND --
E&E’s “Energy Wire” story: 'Rights of nature' tribal case may upend pipeline law
EXCERPT:
A federal court ruling siding with White Earth would chart a powerful new course for rights of nature challenges.
While countries like Ecuador, Colombia and New Zealand have recognized the rights of non-human parties to bring cases, lawsuits on behalf of sea turtles and other vulnerable species have been tossed out of U.S. courts for lack of standing.
Other countries have also passed rights of nature laws or constitutional amendments, but such an approach is unlikely to succeed in the United States, said Houck. "The way to get it into American law is to do it through Indigenous law," he said.
A U.S. court ruling in favor of White Earth’s argument could have important implications across the country where other tribal nations have codified similar natural protections.
"Certainly a lot of academics like me are paying close attention," said N. Bruce Duthu, a professor of Native American studies at Dartmouth College and an enrolled member of the United Houma Nation of Louisiana.
"What are the interests of the rice?" Duthu said. "How do we articulate what that looks like from a legal standpoint? What are the demands we can now place or impose on parties?"