American Indian Educational Law & Leadership

Law Summaries and Court Case Briefings
Assignment Sheet
Students are responsible for submitting law summaries and court case briefings for each American Indian education law and court case that is assigned.
Laws
All of the laws included in the chapter by Dr. Linda Sue Warner in Module 3 assigned readings.
Public Act 174. (1976). Waiver of Tuition for North American Indians (The Michigan Indian Tuition Waiver). https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(gvd5jg55piggstzj0uzesi45))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-Act-174-of-1976
Public Law 99-298. (1985). To amend title 25, United States Code, relating to Indian education programs, and for other purposes.
http://uscode.house.gov/statutes/1985/1985-099-0228.pdf

Native CLASS Act (proposed). http://niea.org/data/files/policy/native_class_act_draft.pdf
Indian Education Court Cases
Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U.S. 50 (1908).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=210&invol=50

Matter of McMillan, 226 S.E.2d 693, 30 N.C. App. 235 (1976).
http://leagle.com/decision/1976919226SE2d693_1816.xml/MATTER%20OF%20McMILLAN

Children of the Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomy Tribes v. The Regents of the University of Michigan, 305 N.W.2d 522, 104 Mich. App. 482 (1981).
http://www.leagle.com/decision/1981586104MichApp482_1533
Law Summaries
Each law summary should contain the title and citation (use APA style unless otherwise pre-approved) of the law and a short description. Descriptions are to be concise and no more than four paragraphs in length, and will answer questions about who, what, where, when, why, and how. For instance, why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal), who are the parties involved, what is required of the different parties, when and where is it supposed to occur, and how is it to be accomplished.
Here is an example of a title and citation:
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, § 2, 104 Stat. 328 (1991).
Here is an example of a description:
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is focused on making our society more accessible to individuals with disabilities. The Act has five titles including employment, public services, public accommodations, telecommunications, and miscellaneous.
Employment provisions include requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations for applicants and employees with disabilities, and prohibits discrimination against them for the same. Public service provisions include a prohibition against denying services, or participation, to people with disabilities including access to public transportation. Public accommodations provisions include requirements for new construction of public facilities and removal of barriers from existing structures.  The telecommunications section requires companies that offer telephone service to the general public to also offer telephone relay service to individuals who use devises for the deaf. The miscellaneous section includes a provisions for prohibiting coercion, threats, or retaliation against individuals with disabilities or those attempting to aid people with disabilities in asserting their rights under the Act.
The Act protects individuals with disabilities including: physical or mental impairments that substantially limit major life activities. Also protected are parents and others who have an association with an individual with a disability, and those who are coerced or subjected to retaliation for assisting people with disabilities in asserting their rights under the Act.
The employment provisions of the Act apply to businesses with fifteen or more employees. Its public accommodations provisions apply to all businesses. State and local governments must comply with all provisions regardless of size or number of employees.
Court Case Briefings
Court case briefings should contain the following: title and citation, facts of the case, and holdings.
Here is an example of a title and citation:
United States v. Lane, 474 U.S. 438 (1986).
Here is an example for facts of the case:
James Lane and his son Dennis, respondents in No. 84-744, were indicted on counts for, inter alia, mail fraud in connection with insurance claims that were made and that insurers paid for fire damage to a restaurant and duplex that James had hired a professional arsonist to burn. The restaurant was operated by James in partnership with others. Count 1 charged James with mail fraud with regard to that fire. The duplex was owned by a different partnership, of which Dennis was one of the partners. Counts 2 through 4 charged both respondents with mail fraud related to the duplex fire. Count 5 charged both respondents with conspiracy to commit mail fraud in connection with a third arson scheme, and Count 6 charged Dennis with perjury before the grand jury. The Federal District Court denied respondents’ pretrial motions for severance on the alleged ground that the charged offenses were misjoined in violation of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 8(b), which provides that two or more defendants may be charged in the same indictment if they are alleged to have participated “in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting an offense or offenses.” The trial then proceeded jointly before a jury. When evidence relating to the restaurant fire was admitted, the court instructed the jury not to consider that evidence against Dennis, and repeated this instruction in the final charge and admonished the jury to consider each count and defendant separately. The jury returned convictions on all counts. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for new trials, holding that the joinder of Count 1 with the other five counts violated Rule 8(b) and that such misjoinder was prejudicial per se. The court, however, rejected respondents’ contention that there was insufficient evidence to support convictions under Counts 2 through 4 because each charged mailing occurred after each related insurance payment had been received and thus after each scheme to defraud had reached fruition.
Here is an example for holdings:
1. Misjoinder under Rule 8(b) is subject to harmless error analysis, and is not reversible error per se. An error involving misjoinder “affects substantial rights” and requires retrial only if the misjoinder results in actual prejudice because it “had substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Kotteakos v. United States, 328 U. S. 750, 328 U. S. 776. It is only by such a holding that Rule 8(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(a) — which provides that any error “which does not affect substantial rights shall be disregarded” — can be brought into substantial harmony. Here, in the face of overwhelming evidence of guilt, the claimed error was harmless. The District Court provided proper limiting jury instructions, and, moreover, the same evidence on Count 1 would likely have been admissible on joint retrial of the other counts to show James’ intent under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). Any error therefore failed to have any “substantial influence” on the verdict. Pp. 474 U. S. 444-450.
2. There was sufficient evidence to support the convictions on Counts 2 through 4. On the evidence and under proper instructions, the jury could properly find that the mailings charged in Counts 2 and 3 took place while the overall scheme charged in the indictment was still continuing and that the scheme was not completed until after the mailing charged in Count 4, because that mailing, as were the others, was intended to “lull” the insurer into a false sense of security. Pp. 474 U. S. 451-453.
735 F.2d 799, affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
Scoring Rubric
Non-Content Guidelines
Format    Law summaries and court case briefings should be double spaced, using Calibri 11 pt font, default margins, APA style (unless otherwise pre-approved), and saved as a Word document.
Content  Guidelines
Law Summaries    Summaries correctly include title and citation and a short description. Descriptions are concise, no more than four paragraphs in length, and answer questions about who, what, where, when, why, and how.
Court Case Briefings    Briefings correctly include the title and citation, facts of the case, and holdings.
Point Value / Meaning    0-59 / Many Mistakes/Omissions    60-79 / Several Mistakes/Omissions    80-99 / Few Mistakes/Omissions    100 / No Mistakes/Omissions
Note: Law summaries and court case briefings scores are graded separately.

Law Summaries

Snyder Act (1921)
(Snyder Act of 1921, Public Law 67-85, 25 U.S.C. 13; Indian Self- Determination and Education Assistance Act, Title IV, Public Law 93-638, as amended, 25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.)
This law was enacted to help with
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Johnson O’Malley Act 1934
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Impact Aid
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Head Start Program Act (1965)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Indian Elementary and Secondary School Assistance Act (1968)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Indian Education Act (1972)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Title IX of the Education Amendments (1972)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (1975)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Education of All Handicapped Children Act (1975) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Education why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.
Amendments (1978)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Tribally Controlled Community College Assistance Act (1978)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.
Indian Child welfare Act (1978)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Augustus F. Hawkins-Robert T. Strafford Elementary and Secondary School Improvement Amendments (1988)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Carl D Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology education Act (1990)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Goals 2000: Educate America Act
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Title IX of the Improving America’s Schools Act (1994)
why was the law enacted (its purpose or goal),
who are the parties involved,
what is required of the different parties,
when and where is it supposed to occur,
and how is it to be accomplished.

Indian Court Cases

Quick Bear v. Leupp, 210 U.S. 50 (1908).
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=210&invol=50

Matter of McMillan, 226 S.E.2d 693, 30 N.C. App. 235 (1976).
http://leagle.com/decision/1976919226SE2d693_1816.xml/MATTER%20OF%20McMILLAN

Children of the Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomy Tribes v. The Regents of the University of Michigan, 305 N.W.2d 522, 104 Mich. App. 482 (1981).
http://www.leagle.com/decision/1981586104MichApp482_1533