Snoqualmie Nine will get day in court
September 18, 2008
By Ed Farrell
Nine banished members of the Snoqualmie Tribe have won what their attorney calls “an important victory” in securing a hearing in U.S. District Court.
Judge James Robart ruled in favor of the banished tribal members Sept. 8 when he determined that the members, most of whom were officers in the tribal council prior to being banished, were denied due process.Attorneys for the tribe had argued that the banishments were an internal tribal action and that the federal court had no jurisdiction in the matter as the Snoqualmie are a sovereign state.
The Snoqualmie Nine – former Tribal Chairman Bill T. Sweet, Vice Chairwoman Carolyn Lubenau, Marilee Mai, Sharon Frelinger, Vyonda Rose, Lois Sweet Dorman, Linda Sweet Baxter, Ben Sweet and Charles “Chuck” Willoughby – filed a Writ of Habeas Corpus in June 2008, charging that the banishments violated the Indian Civil Rights Act.
“This is an important victory,” said Rob Roy Smith, attorney for the banished members. “What this means is the Snoqualmie members get to proceed. This is a substantial hurdle, as many Indian Civil Rights cases never get past go.”
Sweet, who still considers himself Tribal Chairman, said the hearing will allow the group to “get past all this garbage and let the truth be heard.”
Sweet said the 600-member tribe has, to date, only been told one side of the story.
“There’s right things and there’s wrong things,” Sweet said, “and our people need to hear the right things.”
Lubenau, who called the banishments “the paper trail of tears,” said the tribe’s official leadership, including Tribal Administrator Matt Mattson, represent “the new lawlessness” being witnessed throughout Indian Country.
Securing a hearing in federal court – a move Lubenau insisted was necessary because the Snoqualmie Tribe has never created a tribal court – is the only chance the banished members have to reclaim their heritage.
“There’s no place else for us to go,” she said.
In the original Writ of Habeas Corpus, Smith asked the court to vacate the banishment, which was formally imposed May 8, and restore the nine members to the tribal membership rolls.
With banishment came an end to all tribal benefits, including access to Indian Health, Smith said.
“One of my clients recently had a baby and another had to have surgery,” Smith said. “These people are facing great difficulties in paying for this.”
In his ruling, Robart denied several motions to dismiss by the tribe, citing ample case law that allows such hearings to go forward.
Most significantly, Robart ruled that the banished members were not challenging the tribe’s inherent right to take the action, but rather “they challenge the manner in which the banishments took place as violating the fundamental principles of due process and equal protection.”
Robart also noted that the lack of a tribal court left the banished members “no other remedy,” thereby denying a tribal request to dismiss on the grounds the banished members failed to redress the banishments with the tribe.
Tribal attorneys further argued that the court had no jurisdiction because the banishments did not “limit the geographical movement,” of the former members, yet the banished members have been told they will be subject to arrest should they attempt to set foot on tribal property.
Smith said no date has been set for the hearing, but he anticipates the Snoqualmie Nine will have their next day in court by the end of the year.
Reach reporter Ed Farrell at efarrell@snovalleystar.com or 392-6434.
Comments
3 Responses to “Snoqualmie Nine will get day in court”
Got something to say?
Before you comment, please note:
- These comments are moderated.
- Comments should be relevant to the topic at hand and contribute to its discussion.
- Personal attacks and/or excessive profanity will not be tolerated and such comments will not be approved.
- This is not your personal chat room or forum, so please stay on topic.
Way to go. I’m so happy to hear a victory for the indians who have been wronged by greedy tribal members who just want more money for themselves. I hope this is a long line of victories for any and all of the native people who have been wronged by their people.
If you need 1/8 blood to be a Snoqualmie then these nine members should win their case, if they cannot, they lose. If the Snoqualmie tribe disband these nine members with 1/8 or greater, this tribal government, the individuals, should be punished with a large fine owed to these nine people. Let me remind you, you are choosing heaven or hell when you do good or evil deeds. You can seek all the money you want, at the end of your time, the money will stay on earth, but you’re soul will be in jeapardy for those who had done evil deeds on earth. There will be no mercy on those who did not have mercy on others.
How would this court case have played out if the council members were not the blood of the nation/ committed crimes knowing that they could use sovereignty issues to protect themselves? The real question is, what if the committed crimes against the laws of the nation and involved in racketeering themselves?? Do the people of the nation have the right to charge them with the crimes and because they have committed “High Treason” they have violated their own rights to “sovereignty”?? It would be the same as committing crimes against the constitution? You committ a crime, you go to prison or the Death Penalty. I would choose the Death Penalty for murder, rape, etc. under the major crime act.