9th Circuit: Native American Student's Suit Over Wearing Eagle Feather at Graduation Should Move Ahead

 In Waln v. Dysart School District, (9th Cir., Dec. 9, 2022), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that a free speech and free exercise suit against an Arizona school district should not have been dismissed by the district court.  The school district refused to allow a Native American student to wear an eagle feather in her cap during graduation ceremonies. Wearing the eagle feather, which had been blessed and is considered a sacred object, was a religious practice. Sustaining plaintiff's Free Exercise claim, a majority of the court said in part:

Plaintiff has carried her burden, at the motion-to-dismiss stage, to show that the District’s policy [prohibiting decoration of graduation caps] is not generally applicable because it was enforced in a selective manner.

The court also held that plaintiff should be able to move ahead on her free speech claim, saying in part:

Here, the complaint plausibly alleges that the District enforced its facially neutral policy in a selective way.

The majority rejected the school district's contention that it had a compelling interest in complying with the Establishment Clause. 

Judge Baker filed an opinion dissenting in part, contending that plaintiff had not adequately alleged that the school district selectively enforced its policy against decorating graduation caps. However, he believed that the district court erred in not permitting plaintiff to amend her complaint to provide more factual content.

RFRA Defense Cannot Be Decided On Pre-Trial Motion

In United States v. Skeet, (D NM, Aug. 26, 2022), a New Mexico federal district court held that defendant, a member of the Navajo nation, must assert as a defense at trial rather than in a pre-trial motion, the contention that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Gold Eagle Protection Act violate his rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The court said in part:

[B]ecause Mr. Skeet’s RFRA defense implicates primarily factual rather than legal issues, the Court finds that this defense is “territory reserved to the jury as the ultimate finder of fact in our criminal justice system.” ... Additionally, because the RFRA defense goes to the ultimate issue of Mr. Skeet’s guilt, it would require a trial on the merits of the case—a prospect that is proscribed by Rule 12(b)(1) and that disserves judicial economy.... Nevertheless, Mr. Skeet is welcome to assert a RFRA defense at trial.

Rules On Tribal Possession of Eagle Remains Are Liberalized

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced last week that it has revised its policy on handling of bald and golden eagle remains found on lands of recognized Indian tribes. Under previous rules, the remains would be transferred to the National Eagle Repository.  Now, federally recognized tribes that wish to keep eagle remains found on their land will be able to do so once they report the find to law enforcement officials and officials determine that the eagle was not taken intentionally and does not pose human health risks:

Under the updated policy, a federally recognized Tribe must receive a permit prior to possessing eagle remains found within Indian Country. When a Tribal member or an employee of a federally recognized Tribe discovers eagle remains, he or she must report it immediately to Tribal or Service law enforcement officials.

Eagle remains found and reported may be eligible for return to the federally recognized Tribe for religious purposes after the Service completes any activities it deems necessary for law enforcement or for scientific management reasons.

Salt Lake Tribune reports on the rule change.

Rulemaking Petition Seeks Changes In Eagle Feather Restrictions

Yesterday the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty announced the filing of a formal Rulemaking Petition (full text) with the Department of Interior on behalf of Native American feather dancer Robert Soto.  The petition seeks rule changes that would expand the ability of Native Americans who are not members of federally recognized tribes to use eagle feathers in their religious worship:

The Department’s regulations are so restrictive that they ban all kinds of sincere religious behavior. Today, nearly every bird species native to North America is federally protected.  So, a grandmother who bestows an eagle feather on her nonenrolled grandson to honor his college graduation turns both herself and her grandson into criminals. A Native American teenager adopted by a non-Native family breaks the law when he prays with a feather to reconnect with the spirits of his ancestors. And a member of a state-recognized tribe is subject to prosecution merely for possessing a single protected feather....

Effective reform in this area would do three things: First, it would broaden the Morton Policy to include all sincere religious believers who use federally protected feathers in their religious exercise—as both the Constitution and the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) require. Second, it would officially promulgate this policy as a formal rule rather than rely on informal guidance, ending decades of legal limbo that has had disastrous consequences for many Native Americans. Third, it would empower Native American tribes to help combat the illegal commercialization of federally protected feathers.

The petition grows out of the settlement of a suit challenging current rules. (See prior related posting.)