Carcieri v. Salazar - Turtle Talk Post

This was posted a couple days ago at the Turtle Talk website. Turtle Talk is the blog for the Indigenous Law and Policy Center at Michigan State University College of Law.

April 29, 2009...11:35 pm

Seventeen State AGs Urge Congress Not to Quick-Fix Carcieri

Here is the letter to the ranking members of the SCIA and the House Resources Committee from the attorneys general of 17 states — carcieri-state-ags-ltr-to-hill-april-24-2009

The letter asserts that Carcieri is a symptom of a greater frustration felt by state governments relating to the current fee to trust process and asking Congress to consider state interests. Importantly, the letter offers nothing suggesting what those interests might be or what these AGs want in a potential Carcieri fix.

There are at least two reasons for this, I suspect. First, 17 AGs probably can’t agree on what those state interests are. And second, maybe these state AGs are leaving unsaid the obvious — they want more control over Indian lands, perhaps even veto power over fee to trust transfers and over activities on trust land.

And that’s what the Supreme Court handed state governments with their very wrongheaded decision in Carcieri. A Carcieri cure might be worse than the disease.

http://turtletalk.wordpress.com/2009/04/29/seventeen-state-ags-urge-congress-not-to-quick-fix-carcieri/