United Nations Further Intervenes at Nooksack, Interior Secretary Faces Human Rights Criticism

The United Nations has once again intervened in the Nooksack human rights calamity, in unprecedented fashion.

In each of the last three years, United Nations human rights officials have decried human rights violations against over 60 Indigenous persons at Nooksack.

Last Friday, the UN criticized the United States and Nooksack governments for failing to substantively respond to its two prior interventions regarding the violated property rights of seven families, “who self-identify as Indigenous Nooksack, but had been disenrolled from Nooksack tribal membership.” The UN is also expressing concern about “fair trial violations” at Nooksack.

Each UN intervention, one after the next, is unprecedented, both in Geneva and the United States. That is because a great many human rights advocates are highly deferential to Tribal sovereignty and otherwise afraid to criticize Tribal nations for human rights abuse.

The UN’s latest intervention comes as U.S. Interior Department Secretary Deb Haaland faces rising criticism for ignoring Indigenous human rights abuses on Tribal lands.

Secretary Haaland’s Human Rights Record Criticized

Over the last few months, Secretary Haaland’s Indigenous human rights record has been increasingly questioned or criticized.

NPR recently reported how she has failed to implement a law she spearheaded while in Congress to hold the federal government accountable for the overwhelming number of missing or murdered Indigenous people in the U.S. each year, explaining:

Indigenous people have held Deb Haaland in high regard since she became the first-ever Indigenous cabinet secretary, so a lot of people are hesitant to criticize her. But a number of commissioners say their confidence in her ability to champion Indigenous needs is slipping.

Similarly, The New York Times reported:

Despite President Biden naming the first Indigenous cabinet secretary, some Indigenous voters said they still felt voiceless in Washington, and ignored by a federal government that they say has inflicted centuries of harm.

In its latest intervention, the UN spotlighted the failure by Secretary Haaland and the Biden administration, as well as Washington state and Nooksack authorities, to protect the seven families’ federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) home ownership rights.

Secretary Haaland has dodged the politically fraught human rights calamity at Nooksack—including each of the UN’s interventions since 2022—as she aspires to run for the New Mexico governorship. She is expected to be the first cabinet Secretary to leave the administration after the November presidential election.

In a June 2024 email, Secretary Haaland’s office deflected a plea from the seven Nooksack families towards the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (calling it a HUD “issue”) and to the State Department, despite both agencies looking to Interior as the “led agency” regarding the human rights violations at Nooksack as well as the UN’s historic interventions.

The UN’s Tribal Interventions “Never Before Seen”

Prior to 2022, at Nooksack, the UN had never before waded into what federal and tribal officials in the United States blithely call “an internal matter.” As the Seattle Times explained in 2023:

Eric Eberhard, a University of Washington School of Law professor and an expert on Native legal issues, has never before seen U.N. experts wade into “what might be viewed as an internal tribal matter,” as opposed to a disagreement between a tribe and the U.S. Not once, let alone twice, he said.

A few passages from the UN’s 2023 communication to the State Department are incisive, and historic.

The UN explained “that all level of state authorities, national, regional, local, Parish, Tribe, and any other, have to abide by national and internationally recognized human rights law and standards and that the national Government has the duty to oversee that this takes place.”

The UN also “emphasize[d] that States and indigenous authorities share the responsibility for ensuring that processes and decisions by indigenous authorities accord with international human rights, particularly in the context of possible conflicts between the rights and interests of individual indigenous members and the collective rights and interest of an indigenous people or community.” 

In what may prove over time to be a watershed moment in domestic Indigenous human rights protection vis-a-vis Tribal nations, the UN proclaimed: “indigenous institutions and justice systems have an obligation to comply with international human rights standards.”

Also prior to 2022, the UN had never before intervened with a Tribal nation that had violated internationally recognized human rights laws.

In its 2023 communication to the Nooksack Tribe, the UN “emphasize[d] that the UNDRIP protects both individual and collective rights of indigenous peoples and that it needs to be interpreted as complementing - and not acting contrary - to the principles of justice, democracy, respect for human rights, equality and non-discrimination, good governance and good faith.”

The UN’s interventions at Nooksack are believed to represent Geneva’s first application of the UNDRIP’s individual rights provisions to Tribal nations, which generally stand above reproach in civil and human rights communities.

In 2021, Secretary Haaland testified before the UN, proclaiming: “I strongly affirm the United States’ support for the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and our commitment to advancing Indigenous Peoples’ rights at home and abroad.” Her domestic human rights record tells a different story.

Gabe Galanda is an Indigenous rights attorney and the managing lawyer at Galanda Broadman. He has been named to Best Lawyers in America in the fields of Native American Law and Gaming Law from 2007 to 2024, and dubbed a Super Lawyer by his peers from 2013 to 2024. Below are all of the communications between the UN, State Department, and Nooksack Tribe since 2022.

###

2-1-22 UN OHRC Communication to US State Department

2-24-22 US State Department Communication to UN OHRC

3-31-23 UN OHCR Communication to Nooksack Tribe

3-31-23-UN OHRC Communication to US State Department

6-1-23 US State Department Communication to UN OHRC

6-6-23 Nooksack Tribe Communication to UN OHRC

9-27-24 UN OHCR Impact of the Work of Special Procedures - Policy Reform - Nooksack

Nooksack Judge's Refusal to Recuse from Eviction Ruling Raises “Judicial Misconduct” Concerns

Nooksack Judge Pro Tem Charles Hostnik presides over a Nooksack tribal court eviction hearing in 2023; Norma Aldredge watches on with Michelle Roberts

According to Indian Country Today, the same Nooksack trial court judge who ordered the eviction of several Nooksack families refused to recuse himself from an a closely related appellate eviction ruling that came down last week. As a result, Nooksack elders and families are now threatened with physical eviction by Tribal police from homes they have rented to own for nearly twenty years.

“Judicial Misconduct” at Nooksack

As reported, Tacoma lawyer Charles Hostnik “sat on an appeal that involves the four cases he decided as pro tem tribal court judge” in 2023. Hostnik “did not recuse himself and was not removed from the panel” that affirmed eviction decisions in three “connected” cases on Wednesday. While writing the September 18, 2024 appellate ruling, Hostnik “included pages of identical text to his February 2023 ruling.”

Verbatim excerpts of Hostnik's February 2023 summary judgment decisions (top) and September 2024 appellate ruling (bottom)

Hostnik, Indian Country Today reported, “used his summary judgment decisions against certain members of the family to decide and write the appellate opinion against the others.”

On August 29, 2024, Michelle Roberts, lay advocate for herself and the Nooksack families, filed a motion for Hostnik’s recusal. Nooksack Appeals Court Chief Judge Rajeev Majumdar denied her request because it “came at a late hour.” Majumdar did not address Roberts’s arguments that under Nooksack law, Hostnik’s consideration of essentially “his own decisions” at the Nooksack trial court level, amounted to a conflict of interest on appeal according to Nooksack law.

Last Wednesday night, Roberts, who along with her dad and uncle are now facing eviction from their federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit homes, shared her stunned dismay with Indian Country Today reporter and Northwest Bureau Chief Luna Reyna:

I will never forget being in front of the judge at Nooksack and then realizing that the same judge was on the appellate court of judges asking me questions. Thinking, is this judge really part of our appeals being able to make a decision on his own decision against his own decision? I don’t even know how to write that.

The next day, Gabriel Galanda filed a brief before the Nooksack appeals court that appended highlighted copies of Hostnik’s appellate ruling and prior summary judgment rulings, showing the pages of language he copied. He and other Galanda Broadman lawyers have their own due process appeal pending before the Nooksack appeals court. Galanda filed the brief in that proceeding.

Galanda Broadman lawyers have been representing the seven Nooksack families since 2013, but Galanda and other firm lawyers remain “blocked from practicing law at Nooksack.” Last year, as Nooksack pro tem judge, Hostnik “blocked Galanda from even helping his clients write their court papers since he was no longer able to represent them in court.” Although under Washington sate ethics laws, “lawyers may ghostwrite for pro se parties in state court civil litigation,” Hostnik foreclosed that legal assistance to the seven families.

Meanwhile, the Washington State Bar Association (WSBA) has declined to exercise its established jurisdiction over lawyer misconduct to discipline any of the several state-licensed lawyers who caused the strategic disbarment of eight Galanda Broadman lawyers in 2016.

In 2022, Majumdar served as WSBA President while the organization was considering disciplinary grievances against Ray Dodge, the chief architect of Galanda Broadman’s disbarment. When Majumdar became a Nooksack pro tem judge, that year, his dual roles raised appearance of fairness concerns within the WSBA’s Board of Governors, causing the board to consider a new ethical rule to disallow judges from serving elected state bar leadership positions.

To avoid appearance of fairness issues within either state courts or bar associations, at least nineteen state bar associations do not allow judges or pro tem judges from serving in elected bar leadership positions. In Utah, for example, judges are not “permitted to accept governmental appointments that could interfere with the effectiveness and independence of the judiciary.” A divided WSBA Board of Governors, however, declined to adopt the proposed ethical rule. Majumdar later became the Nooksack appeals court’s Chief Judge.

Hostnik and Majumdar are not believed to be considering the Galanda Broadman lawyers’ pending due process appeal, but both collaborated to issue last week’s appellate ruling against the Nooksack families. In that ruling, which Majumdar signed, Hostnik also invited Nooksack housing authorities to “collaborate with the Nooksack Police Department as necessary . . . on evictions."

United Nation human rights experts have decried the Tribal political deployment of armed Nooksack cops to the families’ homes since 2021.

Michelle Roberts appears before Nooksack Appeals Court Chief Judge Rajeev Majumdar on August 20, 2024

“So Incredibly Beyond the Pale”

The appellate brief Galanda filed on Thursday reads:

Yesterday, the Appeals Panel in Cause 2024-CI-APL-004 affirmed Nooksack trial court summary judgment decisions against three Pro se Appellants. Appendix A. Appellate Judge Charles Hostnik wrote the Appellate Opinion and Chief Judge Rajeev Majumdar issued the decision.  Compare Appendix A at 12-16, with Appendices B, C at 3-5, 11-13. Astonishingly, Judge Hostnik’s Appellate Opinion includes five pages of verbatim language lifted from summary judgment decisions that Judge Hostnik wrote against Pro se Appellants in 2024-CI-APL-002 as Tribal Court Pro Tem Judge in 2023. Id. (highlighted verbatim text).

This is precisely what Michelle Roberts warned would happen when she sought Judge Hostnik’s recusal from Cause 2024-CI-APL-004 on August 29, 2024. She wrote:

“During the hearing on Tuesday, Nooksack appellate judge Charles Hostnik was one of the three appellate judges. He was also the pro tem tribal court judge on Olive Oshiro, Norma Aldredge, Alex Mills, and Saturnino Javier’s eviction cases. All seven of us are more or less in the same legal position when it comes to our LIHTC homes.  All of the LIHTC property rights issues are the same.  I prepared all seven of our appeal notices and they are the same or similar. . . . Because all seven cases are connected, Judge Hostnik is basically sitting on an appeal that involves the four cases he decided as pro tem tribal court judge.  It would be unfair for him to sit on my, my dad Michael Rabang, and my uncle Francisco Rabang’s appeals. Judge Hostnik issued “summary judgment” in the Oshiro, Aldredge, Mills, and Javier cases, and is now considering whether “summary judgment” was correct in our related appeals. He would naturally want to find in favor of “summary judgment.”  I do not know how he can be impartial to his own decisions. This is a Conflict of Interest.”

Ms. Roberts’s words proved prescient.  Judge Hostnik “naturally [found] in favor of “summary judgment,” going so far as to graft pages of language in his summary judgment orders into the Appellate Opinion issued against Michelle and her father and uncle. Compare Appendix A at 12-16, with Appendices B, C at 3-5, 11-13 (highlighted verbatim text).

Judge Hostnik should have recused himself from serving on the the Appeals Panel in Cause 2024-CI-APL-004, or Chief Judge Majumdar should have granted Ms. Roberts’s recusal motion and disqualified Judge Hostnik from serving on that panel.

Instead, on September 5, 2024, Chief Judge Majumdar denied Ms. Roberts’s recusal motion because it “came at a late hour,” after he appointed Judge Hostnik to the Appeals Panel in Cause 2024-CI-APL-004 on April 17, 2024.  As she told Chief Judge Majumdar in her motion, it was not until August 27, 2024 when Ms. Roberts realized that the same judge who “issued ‘summary judgment’ in the Oshiro, Aldredge, Mills, and Javier cases, and is now considering whether ‘summary judgment’ was correct in our related appeals [Roberts, M. Rabang, and F. Rabang].” This speaks to precisely why Pro se Appellants need—and have always needed—legal counsel in these property and housing rights appeals—as is their right at Nooksack.

There is no other court in the country—Tribal, state, or federal—where a judge who decided four “connected cases” at the trial court level, would sit on an appeal of three other “connected cases . . . where [a]ll of the LIHTC property rights issues are the same.”  Not one.  Rules and norms of judicial conduct would not allow such impropriety.  And it is not only Pro se Appellants who suffer from this judicial impropriety as they fear evictions and property takings—it is Tribal nations and judiciaries writ large. Declaration of Gabriel S. Galanda (June 3, 2024), Ex. E (Ex. 8 thereto) (Washington State Bar Association (April 10, 2018) at 3: The Nooksack ‘’justice system’ is probably not worthy of that description”); id. (Ex. 4 thereto) at 8-9 (Amici Curiae Law Professors (Sept. 19, 2016): “[T]he ripple effect of [the] lawlessness will reach far beyond the boundaries of Nooksack. . . . The suspicions and denigrations of tribal courts as second-class forums will gain credence among those that are hostile to tribal sovereignty.”). 

“This judicial misconduct would not happen in any other court system in the country,” Galanda reiterated to Indian Country Today. “It is all so incredibly beyond the pale.”

Federal Civil Rights Litigation Associate Position Announcement

Galanda Broadman, PLLC, an Indigenous rights firm with eight lawyers and offices in Seattle and Yakima, Washington, and Bend, Oregon, seeks to add an experienced civil litigation associate to bring federal civil rights claims against state and local government defendants.

(We are also hiring for a second, Tribal law and federal court litigation associate.)

Galanda Broadman brings federal court, Section 1983 actions for serious/catastrophic personal injury or wrongful death, primarily involving Indigenous plaintiffs.  The firm seeks a lawyer who is deeply committed to representing Indigenous interests, who is state bar licensed in Washington state, and who has civil litigation or a judicial clerk experience.  The lawyer would primarily help bring federal Section 1983 civil rights lawsuits in Washington federal district courts. 

We prefer applicants with at least three years of experience but exceptions can be made for exceptional candidates.  Proven motion and civil rules practice, if not trial experience, and the ability to self-direct are critical. Impeccable writing and research skills; critical and audacious thinking; strong oral advocacy; tremendous work ethic; tenacity; and sound ethics are required. 

Salary DOE. 

Qualified applicants should submit a cover letter tailored to this announcement, as well as a résumé, writing sample, transcript, and list of at least three educational or professional references.  Submissions must be directed to Alice Hall, the firm’s Office Manager, at alice@galandabroadman.com. 

Applications directed elsewhere will not be considered.

Washington Post Quotes Gabe Galanda Regarding Police "Partisanship and Political Ideology"

Gabe Galanda is quoted by The Washington Post in, “Police can’t decorate gear after they wore Blue Lives flags and killed Black man,” regarding the settlement obtained by the family of Timothy Green.

As reported:

The officer who fatally shot Timothy Green near a Washington state coffee shop wore gloves with a Blue Lives Matter emblem while attempting to treat his wounds. The on-scene commander had adorned his department-issued laptop with a badge showing a coiled rattlesnake and a mantra often understood by extremism researchers to represent right-wing, anti-government ideology.

Now, according to a settlement finalized last week between the city of Olympia, Wash., and the family of Green, a Black man who was having a psychotic episode when he was killed in 2022, Olympia police must stop personalizing city equipment. The city must also pay Green’s family $600,000.

As to the Blue Lives Matter emblems and anti-government badge displayed by Olympia police officer when Timothy was killed, Gabe is quoted as follows:

“This is not unique to the city of Olympia — this is happening countrywide,” said Gabe Galanda, one of the Green family’s attorneys. “Whatever law enforcement is doing, they have to be above partisanship or political ideology.”

Gabe Galanda is an Indigenous rights attorney and the managing lawyer at Galanda Broadman. He has been named to Best Lawyers in America in the fields of Native American Law and Gaming Law from 2007 to 2024, and dubbed a Super Lawyer by his peers from 2013 to 2024.

Gabe Galanda, Shelby Stoner Ranked Among Best Lawyers in America

Gabe Galanda and Shelby Stoner’s peers have named them both to the prestigious Best Lawyers in America list for 2025.

Gabe has been honored among the Best Lawyers in America® in Native American and gaming law for the eighteenth consecutive year. He has also been dubbed a Super Lawyer by his peers from 2013 to 2024. He is the managing lawyer at Galanda Broadman.

Shelby has been named “One to Watch” by Best Lawyers in America in the fields of environmental and labor and employment litigation. She was also named a Rising Star by by Super Lawyers® magazine in 2024. She is Of Counsel at Galanda Broadman.

Three Galanda Broadman Indigenous Rights Lawyers Honored by Super Lawyers

Indigenous rights lawyers Gabe Galanda (Round Valley), Amber Penn-Roco (Chehalis), and Shelby Stoner were each honored by Super Lawyers magazine for 2024. Gabe was named a “Super Lawyer” and Amber and Shelby “Rising Stars,” all in the field of Native American Law.

Gabe’s practice focuses on complex, multi-party litigation and crisis management, representing Indigenous nations, businesses and citizens.

Amber’s practice focuses on tribal sovereignty issues, including environmental issues, economic development, and complex Indian Country litigation.

Shelby’s practice focuses on high-impact cases involving tribal law, Indigenous rights and other civil rights matters, land and environmental issues, and appellate litigation.

With eight lawyers and offices in Seattle and Yakima, Washington and Bend, Oregon, the firm is dedicated to advancing and protecting Indigenous rights.

New York Times Quotes Gabe Galanda Regarding Tribal Gaming "Arms Race"

Gabe Galanda is quoted in The New York Times regarding what he dubs an off-reservation gaming “arms race” between Tribal nations in the Pacific Northwest.

“We’re now seeing an arms race,” said Gabriel S. Galanda, an Indigenous rights lawyer representing the Cow Creek Umpqua tribe, whose Seven Feathers casino, just an hour north of Medford on Interstate 5, would be faced with new competition. “You can literally look at the dominoes falling in every direction, from Washington to Oregon, and Oregon to California.”

Earlier this year, Gabe was quoted by the Los Angeles Times on the same subject. He is concerned about how the inter-Tribal arms race us causing time-honored kinship bonds between Tribal nations to fissure and fracture. As Gabe explains in his recent scholarly essay that the LA Times featured:

Tribal gaming politicians seek to develop casinos in other ways that are antithetical to inter-Tribal kinship. They are emboldened by the United States, which is “allowing Tribes to acquire land for casinos in areas to which they have no historical connection, and are in many instances, the ancestral homelands of other Indigenous peoples.”

On Secretary Deb Haaland’s watch, as The New York Times explains, the Interior Department recently “made it much easier for the federal government to take other lands into trust for the benefit of tribes” and “widened the possibilities for using those new lands for gambling projects.”

Gabe expresses concern that now “Interior will ‘presume’ an off-reservation gaming trust acquisition is in a Tribal applicant’s best interest, without regard for other Tribal nations’ ancestral, historical, or Treaty interests.” He criticizes that policy as an “over-correction” that is antithetical to age-old inter-Tribal kinship systems:

The Biden administration’s policy fosters an every-Tribe-for-itself mentality, encourages Tribal politicians to dishonor ancestry and manipulate anthropology, and threatens the extended kinship proposition….With Indigenous kinship responsibilities impinged and ancestral relations desecrated for economic gain, the inter-Tribal conflicts are quite personal and prone to spilling over into other arenas where solidarity is needed to protect Tribal nationhood or Indigenous humanity.

The Coquille Tribe’s off-reservation gaming project in Medford exemplifies these concerns. Coquille has falsely claimed an ancestral connection tot he Rogue Valley, which caused three northern California Tribal Chairman to publish a column in The Oregonian titled “History Matters”:

There are no Indigenous teachings or other historical evidence of ancestral ties between the Coquille People and the Rogue River Valley. It is most telling that there is no linguistic connection between the Coquille and the Takelman and Shastan speakers of the Rogue River Valley. Historically speaking, the Coquille simply did not exist in Medford.

Unless there is a federal and inter-Tribal course correction, Tribal false histories and gaming greed will overthrow Indigenous kinship traditions and places. Where would that leave us as Indigenous peoples?

Gabe Galanda is an Indigenous rights attorney and the managing lawyer at Galanda Broadman. He has been named to Best Lawyers in America in the fields of Native American Law and Gaming Law from 2007 to 2024, and dubbed a Super Lawyer by his peers from 2013 to 2024.

Shelby Stoner Joins Galanda Broadman

Shelby Stoner has joined Galanda Broadman PLLC as Of Counsel, focusing on complex litigation involving Tribal nations and enterprises and Indigenous citizens. Shelby also provides employment counsel to Tribal employers.

“We are ecstatic to have Shelby join our team,” said Gabriel S. Galanda, Managing Lawyer of Galanda Broadman. “She brings deep courtroom and litigation experience to our Tribal and Indigenous clients.”

Shelby joins the firm after clerking for the Hon. Eric D. Miller of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and the Hon. Thomas S. Zilly of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. In addition, Shelby previously worked as a litigation associate at K&L Gates LLP, where she represented the Duwamish Tribe in its pursuit for federal recognition.

Shelby graduated from the University of Washington School of Law in 2017, where she graduated with high honors and served as an Articles Editor of the Washington Law Review. She holds a Master of Arts in International Affairs from Columbia University and a Bachelor of Arts in International Studies from the University of Washington.

Before law school, Shelby worked in the nonprofit sector, focusing on global economic development, women’s rights, youth development, and education. She also served as a Peace Corps volunteer in the Middle East.

Shelby lives on the Olympic Peninsula where she enjoys cycling, hiking, boating, reading fiction, and spending time with her family. Shelby serves on the Board of Directors of the Bainbridge Island Art Museum (BIMA) and the Bainbridge Ballet Performance Group. She is also active in her children’s elementary school parent-teacher organization (PTO) and Spanish immersion program. 

Galanda Broadman is an Indigenous rights law firm with offices in Seattle and Yakima, Washington and Bend, Oregon. The firm is dedicated to advancing Indian Treaty and other tribal sovereign legal rights as well as Indigenous human rights.

“Nooksack 306” Documentary to Premiere Tuesday Night in Seattle

Produced by Converge Media, the Film Will Be Shown at The Iconic Egyptian Theater During Seattle’s Scope Screenings

On Tuesday night, June 25, a new documentary film made by Converge Media, “Nooksack 306,” will premiere during the Scope Screenings Film Festival.  A trailer for the movie can be watched here.

The short digital movie dives into the struggle faced by Indigenous people who are being disenrolled by tribal politicians and threatened with losing their homes and being exiled from their homelands.

Converge Media profiles members of the group of disenrolled Nooksack Indigenous people known as the Nooksack 306.  Last year, the family allowed the filmmakers access to their daily lives in Deming, Washington, sharing the story of their twelve-year political persecution.

“We are proud to be able to help tell this story and share the message of the challenges that are facing the Nooksack 306,” said Converge Media’s Head of Production, Alaia D’Alessandro. “This film highlights Converge Media’s dedication to uplifting the voices of those who’s stories need amplification and we hope it will raise awareness and make a difference.”

Following a lack of human rights protection by both the Trump and Biden administrations, the United Nations has twice intervened, raising concerns about the unlawful disenrollment of the Nooksack and related ejectment of several Nooksack families from federally subsidized homes they are entitled to own, without any legal protections.  

“Having been denied access to the courts and any human rights protection from this country, the Nooksack 306 have taken their fight to the United Nations and the court of public opinion,” said the Nooksack families’ lawyer, Gabe Galanda. “This is an existential fight for the ages.”

With the United Nations poised to further intervene, pressure is mounting upon the Biden administration, particularly U.S. Interior Department Secretary Deb Haaland, to take some action to protect the Nooksack families’ internationally recognized human rights to housing and belonging.

“It is time for the Biden administration to be consistent about international human rights,” continued Galanda. “Right now, the administration appears highly inconsistent. The United States actively professes to be a beacon of human rights protection abroad, while ignoring egregious human rights violations at home.”

The Nooksack families most recently called upon Secretary Haaland to halt their evictions, which appear imminent. Secretary Haaland is the first Indigenous cabinet Secretary in American history, and she possesses complete authority over Indigenous affairs and lands.

The protracted legal and political battle has ramifications across generations, as grandparents, parents, and children have been catapulted into the fight to remain in their community and keep their homes, many of which have been in the families for decades. This film tells the story from the perspective of those whose voices have been stifled, sharing their Indigenous traditions and amplifying their pleas for support.  

Empowered by the movie, the United Nations’ unprecedented interventions, and other public support, the Nooksack 306 say they aren’t going anywhere.

“We have always been Nooksack and will always be Nooksack,” said Michelle Roberts, who, as a spokesperson for the Nooksack 306 and a credited producer of the documentary, is facing housing eviction. “We have no intention of abandoning our homes or homelands. We belong, our ancestors belonged, and we are staying put.”

SCOTUS Holds IHS Failed its Funding Obligations; Tribes Should Act Now

By Corinne Sebren

On June 6, 2024, in a major victory for tribal health care programs, the United States Supreme Court ruled on the consolidated cases of Becerra v. San Carlos Apache Tribe (No. 23-250) and Becerra v. Northern Arapaho Tribe (No. 23-253).

In its ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth and Tenth Circuit’s earlier decisions, and held that IHS is required to cover the reasonable costs incurred by Tribes when they utilize revenues from third-party payers (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance). 

The High Court’s decision, authored by Chief Justice Roberts, explained that “[b]ecause a self-determination contract requires a tribe to spend program income to further the programs transferred to it in the contract,” the statutory provisions of the ISDEAA “require IHS to pay contract support costs when a tribe does so, just as IHS must pay contract support costs to support a tribe’s spending of the Secretarial amount [i.e., amounts determined through congressional appropriation].”

Chief Justice Roberts was joined by Justices Gorsuch, Jackson, Kagan, Gorsuch, and Sotomayor. Justice Kavanaugh was joined in dissent by Justices Thomas, Alito, and Barrett.

The Court explained that reimbursement of the full amount of contract support costs is necessary to “prevent a funding gap between tribes and IHS,” which would inflict “a penalty for pursuing self-determination” on those Tribes that choose to exercise their rights to operate health care programs under the ISDEAA.

Tribes and Tribal Organizations Should Act Now

The Court’s decision in Becerra confirms the right of Tribes operating healthcare programs under the ISDEAA to obtain payment of contract support costs (CSC) for all activities that are required for compliance with the Tribe’s ISDEAA contract/compact “includ[ing] the third-party-revenue-funded portions of the program.”

The federal government is now required to pay reasonable direct and indirect support costs to Tribes and Tribal organizations that administer healthcare programs under ISDEAA agreements.

All eligible tribal health care programs operating under a 638 contract (or a compact) with IHS to provide health services should act swiftly to present claims and secure the cost reimbursement to which they are entitled. These claims have a six-year statute of limitations, and we expect IHS to strictly enforce this limitations period. It is therefore critical for Tribes and Tribal organizations to act now.

If you would like to request a consult related to filing such a claim, contact the author or another member of the Galanda Broadman team.

Corinne Sebren is an associate with Galanda Broadman. Her practice focuses on civil rights, Indigenous health law, regulatory analysis, and complex litigation.