Advancing the Rights of Nature: Lessons from Sauk-Suiattle v. City of Seattle

Advocates for the “rights of nature” seek recognition of legal rights for natural elements such as mountains, rivers, and non-human species as a means of protecting the environment. In the United States, Tribal Nations have been at the forefront of this nascent movement. In a 2022 Washington state case, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe sued the City of Seattle, alleging that the City’s hydroelectric dams on the Skagit River infringe upon the rights of salmon. Those rights, they claim, include the salmon’s rights to exist, flourish, regenerate, and evolve. The case, known as Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle, was eventually dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and thus was never adjudicated on the merits. However, the case offers important lessons that can and should inform future rights of nature actions

Hawaiʻi’s Housing Crisis: Unpacking the Limits of S.B. 2919

The State of Hawaiʻi is facing a housing crisis exacerbated by natural disasters and public health emergencies. Hawaiʻi’s legislature seeks to ameliorate Hawaiʻi’s housing crisis with Senate Bill 2919, which gives all counties in Hawaiʻi the broad power to regulate short-term rentals. While this law was adopted with laudable intentions, it has significant shortcomings and will likely not solve Hawaiʻi’s longstanding housing crisis. This Comment argues for an alternative, tax-based solution to address the housing crisis

Table of Contents

Table of Content

Expansion of Federal Benefits to Non-Native Adopted Children

There is palpable tension between tribal sovereignty and federal administrative control in the distribution of federal benefits to members of Tribal Nations. This tension is felt by adopted non-Native children who might struggle to receive federal benefits even though the tribe of their adopted parent(s) has accepted them as a member. This Note explores how adoption of a non-Native child by a tribal member intersects with tribal membership and whether that membership should be enough for the child to receive federal benefits. The Note discusses four main topics, including: (1) tribal membership, adoption, and current federal enrollment criteria; (2) an analysis of “Indian” identity/classification; (3) cultural and economic considerations and the impacts of non-Native adoption; and (4) state adoption law and proposed deviation of current federal benefit eligibility requirements. By framing benefit eligibility through the lens of inherent tribal sovereignty, this Note contends that the federal government must treat tribal enrollment criteria as authoritative, not advisory, in determining whether an adopted non-Native child receives federal benefits. It sets forth policy recommendations: if Tribal Nations in their sovereign capacity are permitted to choose who can and cannot become members, they should also be permitted to choose which members are eligible to receive federal benefits. Therefore, current benefit eligibility criteria, including blood quantum levels, should give way to tribal choic