Wednesday, July 12, 2017

San Pasqual Tribal Abuse Case: Allegre v. UNITED STATES: Opposition and Response to Govt's Motion to DISMISS

Plaintiffs OPPOSITION and response to Defendants motion to dismiss plaintiffs' request for Preliminary injunction against the IRREPARABLE harm to San Pasqual TRIBAL members.

San Pasqual is shady, but the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (read: BIA) is shadier still with this tribe.  I am PROUD to be including in an amicus brief here...

Please, help by reading and sharing to expose the corruption within and without the San Pasqual tribe.

Take a look at these articles about San Pasqual:

San Pasqual Lawsuit
San Pasqual Split
San Pasqual Must Lose Right to Run Valley View
San Pasqual Members DENIED their Civil Rights says BIA

1 comment:

Reinstatement_Restitution said...

Looks like a slam dunk to get a permanent injunction. No changes to the San Pasqual Constitution until the lawsuits are settled. It makes sense. San Pasqual will not be harmed, the BIA will have time to defend itself in the lawsuits, and the status quo will be maintained.

The causes of action make my head reel. We know that the BIA is corrupt and that Regional and So-Cal Agency are directly involved in harming tribal members by assisting in disenrollments. The San Pasqual situation is an example of gross abuse of discretion, and actions that are in extreme violation of the law. This gives arbitrary and capricious new meaning.

Refusing to enroll real San Pascal Indians while enrolling non-Indians is so outside the law it is unimaginable that the BIA would support such decisions from a tribe's Enrollment Committee. But what makes this so reprehensible is that the Enrollment Committee actually voted against enrolling the non-Indians and approved the membership of the Plaintiffs. The BIA overturned the Enrollment Committee decisions, violated the Plaintiff's civil rights, and let the tribal leaders operate to harm members.

Let's hope the Court can see that California BIA knows that it violates rights, abuses discretion, and is not in compliance with the law. Even the attorneys for the defense know this is the case. There is no argument that agency acted legitimately. Instead the defense attorneys says this motion should be dismissed because there is no final agency action.

The BIA Solicitors hang their hats on technicalities all the time. This in no way serves the law, and enables the Bureau to hurt more Indians. Can't the Court see this?