Our blog has moved, and is new and improved.

You should be automatically redirected in 3 seconds. If not, visit
and update your bookmarks.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Kaardal on casinos

The Star Tribune this week has run a two-part series on a dispute by certain Dakota Indians over membership in the Mdewakanton Sioux tribe. The rift goes back to the 1862 Sioux uprising in Minnesota, after which tracts of land were set aside in trust for the Dakota who did not fight against the United States. Those tracts became the Shakopee, Prairie Island and Lower Sioux reservations, where casinos earn gazillions.

A lawsuit over membership in the tribes controlling the casino profits is proceeding with approximately 7,000 of the plaintiffs represented by Minneapolis attorney Erick Kaardal. The lawsuit contends the United States has mismanaged the trust by not ensuring that benefits from the land -- i.e., casino profits -- are fairly distributed to all beneficiaries.

Kaardal said he was very pleased with the Strib’s article but also points out that complete information about the lawsuit is available at his firm’s Web site, mklaw.com. Click on the link at the top of the page regarding Wolfchild et al. v. United States.


Anonymous said...

In fact, the lawsuit is not about tribal membership. The lawsuit is filed in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims that maintains the authority to only issue money damage awards against the U.S. It has zero authority to transfer control of land [or casinos] to the plaintiffs. Kaardal has always been quick to mislead regarding the parameters of his lawsuit. Scratch the surface and it is readily apparent that his lawsuit is the proverbial house of cards that will crumble in the face of the slightest wind.

Carl Leith said...

house of cards??..

the three communities Shakopee/Prairie Island, under the 1980 Act assumed the duties and responsibilities of the administrators of the trust, when they did that they became an agent and/or agency of the US
and they also gave up their immunity

Shakopee/Prairie Island strayed from its responsibilities of the administrators of the trust, by adding enrollment requirements (blood quantum, vote-in and even age requirements) to congressional statute

Shakopee/Prairie Island have absolutely no authority to alter congressional statute

Shakopee and Prairie Island only accepts the first Sec. of the 1980 Act..and not the whole Act
if they did they would also recognize the last Sec.

the savings clause..
this savings clause excludes the trust beneficiairies from the whole 1980 Act