"OK, so now the United States has come out in opposition to the Navajo Nation’s cert petition in the Snowbowl case. A few comments:

1. Too bad any effort to persuade the Obama Administration to change course in this case failed. We understand that with very, very new SG Kagan on board there was likely little chance to make that happen, but it’s still disappointing.

2. We think it’s fairly well established that the government was more likely wrong than not that there is no split in authority under the “substantial burden” test. The en banc opinion in the Ninth Circuit was a big stretch, and went way beyond the other circuits that have confronted the question.

But of course, that doesn’t really matter if the Court wants this one. And there’s no reason to think it doesn’t. How many times has the Court used Indian law and Indian religions as a battleground for its religious freedom doctrines? Bowen, Lyng, Smith I, Smith II…."

Get the Story:
Commentary on the Status of the Arizona Snowbowl Cert Petition (Turtle Talk 5/13)

Latest Briefs:
Department of Justice | Arizona Snowbowl

9th Circuit Decision:
Navajo Nation v. US Forest Service (August 8, 2008)

Related Stories:
USDA official can't comment on sacred site case (4/29)
Navajo Nation seeks to resolve sacred site case (4/28)
Obama response awaited in sacred site case (3/23)
Tribes ask Supreme Court to hear sacred site case (1/6)
Tribes weigh next move in sacred site case (10/23)
Indian religious rights cases on high court's horizon (10/21)
9th Circuit delays ruling in sacred site case (10/06)
Interview: Attorney in San Francisco Peaks case (8/22)
Appeals court reverses course on sacred site (8/12)
9th Circuit issues rulings on sacred site, compacts (8/8)