Chukchansi's Ousted Council Member SUES Sally Jewell, Interior and BIA's Amy Dutschke and TROY BURDICK

No wonder the BIA refuses to do their jobs.  One of the few times they do the right thing and they get sued right?  Had they done something earlier and with other tribes, there wouldn't be so many issues.  Interior and BIA are pouring gasoline on the fires they should be putting out.

Patrick Hammond, ousted Chukchansi Tribal Council members has filed suit against Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.    Funny to see that he's concerned about ETHICS.  Wonder if someone had to explain what that was?

As our friend Cathy Cory said:  

This argument, taken from the complaint, actually could refer as well to ALL of the DISENROLLMENTS undertaken at p\Picayune by EVERY TRIBAL COUNCIL SINCE 2006:

All of defendants' actions, as stated above, are (1) arbitrary, capricious, abuse of
discretion, and otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) in excess of statutory jurisdiction,

authority, or limitation, or short of statutory right; (3) without observance of procedure required by

law, within the meaning of 5 US.C. §706(A), (C) and (D); and the Decision is not supported by any evidence in the record and should be vacated by this Court.

Here are some of the facts of his case:

7. Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians Indians ("Tribe") is a federally recognized Indian tribe organized under the provisions of a written constitution ("Constitution"), which has been approved by the voting members of the Tribe.

8. Pursuant to the Constitution, which designates the Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi  Indian Tribal Council ("Tribal Council") as the governing body ofthe Tribe, the Tribal Council adopted a set of By-Laws, which implemented provisions of the Constitution.

9. Under Article IV, Section 2 ofthe Constitution, the Tribal Council is composed of seven  (7) persons who are elected by the eligible voting members of the Tribe.

10. In December 2008 plaintiff was elected to the Tribal Council.

11. In early 2009, the Tribal Council instituted an investigation of alleged tribal Ethics Ordinance violations by plaintiff; on July 28, 2009, the Tribal Council held a hearing concerning the alleged violations, and the Tribal Council found no violations of the tribal Ethics Ordinance.

12. In December, 2010, the Tribe held new elections for the Tribal Council and as a result  ofthat election, plaintiff was again elected as a member ofthe Tribal Council.  

13. On January 13, 2011, the Tribal Council placed plaintiff under a temporary suspension 20 as a member ofthe Tribal Council. The basis for the suspension were the same allegations made in  early 2009 regarding which the Tribal Council found no violations of the tribal Ethics Ordinance.

14. On April 28, 2011, the Tribal Council held a hearing, found Appellant in violation of  the tribal Ethics Ordinance, and removed him from the Tribal Council on or about June 17, 2011.  

15. The actions described in paragraphs 10 and 11 resulted in plaintiff being unethically and unconstitutionally removed from his position on the Tribal Council. 

16. Beginning in June 8, 2011 and continuing through 2012, plaintiff sought assistance from  defendants pertaining to his improper suspension and issues he was having with the Tribal Council over the seating of the newly Tribal Council of the December 3, 2011 Election. 3 ComplaintCase 1:15-at-00201 Document 1 Filed 03/11/15 Page 4 of 9 17. Even though plaintiff sought defendants' assistance in resolving these wrongs, defendants failed to exercise their inherent authority to correct this manifest injustice and error.

18. In 2012, the Tribal Council acting through its subservient housing authority, unsuccessfully attempted to evict plaintiff from his tribal housing unit through California state court, and failed.  

19. Between January 24, 2013, and February 24, 2013, further disputes arose between  members of the Tribal Council and the Tribal Council divided into two factions. One faction was referenced as the "Ayala Quorum Council" and the other as the "Lewis Faction".

20. On November 8, 2013, the Tribal Court granted the Tribe's motion for summary 10 judgment. The Tribal Court entered a final judgment and recognized the Ayala Quorum Council as the lawful governing body of the Tribe and ruled that the members ofthe Lewis Faction were  properly removed.

21. On or about October, 2013, the Lewis Faction formed a so-called tribal court and sued  the Ayala Quorum Council in that court.  

22. From February 2012 through February 2013, (and later also) there were several 16 incidents involving violence related to the Tribal Office that required intervention by the Madera County Sheriff.

See the FULL COMPLAINT HERE