Latest news with #NativeAmericanRightsFund
USA Today
21-05-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
How the GOP's SAVE Act includes 'poison pills' for some voters
How the GOP's SAVE Act includes 'poison pills' for some voters The push by House Republicans and the Trump administration to require voters to show proof of citizenship could imperil Native American votes. Show Caption Hide Caption SAVE Act would make voting harder for spouses who changed names The SAVE Act aims to keep non-citizens from voting, but also could make it more difficult for married people to cast their vote. WASHINGTON ‒ Senate Democrats and voting rights advocates are pushing to defeat a GOP election bill they said could disenfranchise Native American voters. Republicans led passage of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE Act) in the House, but Democrats and advocates have slammed the bill, which among other things would require voters to show proof of citizenship in person for federal elections. The requirement could be difficult for people in rural areas or on reservations because they sometimes have to travel hours to register in person, advocates said. Married women who took their husband's name have also raised concerns about the requirement that the name on their birth certificate match their current identification. The new bill, advocates said, is also expected to be particularly challenging for Native Americans who rely on tribal cards for identification ‒ which typically don't include place of birth, as the new law requires. 'The SAVE Act is really a disastrous bill, and unfortunately it contains many poison pills," said Jacqueline De León, senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund. 'As it's currently designed, it would radically disenfranchise Native American voters across the country." Republicans argue the measure is necessary to protect the integrity of elections and to make sure only citizens vote. 'In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election," Texas Rep. Chip Roy, the GOP sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. The bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate where Democrats vow to fight it. Republicans in the Senate have a 53 to 47 majority so at least seven Democrats would have to join Republicans to pass the bill and overcome the chamber's 60-vote threshold. Barriers to voting Advocates noted that noncitizens are already not allowed to vote in federal elections. There is no evidence that that is happening in significant numbers, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Voting rights advocates said requirements in the SAVE Act would create more hurdles for people living in rural communities and on reservations who sometimes have to travel hundreds of miles to register in person. 'It's sort of an amplified dynamic of the rural voter experience and challenges to have to present in person your citizenship documents to register vote," said Sen. Alex Padilla, of California whose state he said is home to more federally recognized tribes than any other. "If you live down the street from the county courthouse, that's one thing," he said. "But if you're literally a couple of hours from the county seat with limited transportation options, it can pose a significant challenge.' De León said long trips to registrar offices are particularly problematic in Alaska where many Native communities inhabit remote locations. Some require a plane to get to them, she said. 'The fact that Native Americans aren't receiving fair access to register to county seats and to elections offices is in and of itself a problem," De León said. 'But then to require the administration to be placed at those offices means that Native Americans are now doubly disenfranchised." Among the identifications allowed under the bill are passports and tribal IDs that include the place of birth. But advocates argue many Native Americans don't have a passport and can't afford the $130 cost to get one. De León said she doesn't know of any tribal ID that includes the place of birth. 'It's sort of disingenuous to say that tribal IDs are accepted," she said. Eliza Sweren-Becker, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, called it "a red herring," saying most Native voters don't have a tribal ID that would satisfy the bill requirements. 'The bill would harm all American voters," she said. "It would especially burden voters of color and it would especially burden Native voters." Many Native American elders also lack birth certificates, De León said. 'The SAVE Act preys upon the structural deficiencies in Native American communities and makes it difficult and at times impossible for them to comply," she said. GOP wants citizenship proof Roy praised the House for passing the Republican legislation by a vote of 220 to 208, "despite the ridiculous attacks and purposeful misinformation spread about the bill." Lawmakers voted April 10 mostly along party line with four Democrats supporting the bill. In addition to proof of citizenship, the bill also would require states to remove anyone identified as a noncitizen from voter rolls. Supporters have argued that ID requirements have not stopped people from registering to vote. They point to Georgia where state election officials adopted sweeping election reforms, including requiring a photo ID to vote absentee by mail, after the 2020 election. Voting rights advocates had said the state law could disenfranchise many voters of color. 'Turnout and registration numbers show that not only were these provisions not discriminatory, but they had record registration and turnout in Georgia," said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. More: Voters in Georgia are already lining up at the polls In March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order also calling for proof of citizenship in federal elections. The order was part of Trump's continued false claim that he lost the 2020 presidential in part because of voter fraud. "This country is so sick because of the fake elections and the bad elections, and we're going to straighten it out one way or the other," Trump said before signing the order. Advocates warn that Trump's order and the SAVE Act will discourage voting, particularly among people of color. "The executive order and the SAVE Act are really two sides of the same coin and again reflect this emerging threat that the federal government is getting into the voter suppression business, which is alarming and a dangerous sign for our democracy,' Sweren-Becker said. Contributing: Riley Beggin, Trevor Hughes Follow Deborah Berry on X at @dberrygannett and on Bluesky at @
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
How the GOP's SAVE Act includes 'poison pills' for some voters
WASHINGTON ‒ Senate Democrats and voting rights advocates are pushing to defeat a GOP election bill they said could disenfranchise Native American voters. Republicans led passage of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE Act) in the House, but Democrats and advocates have slammed the bill, which among other things would require voters to show proof of citizenship in person for federal elections. The requirement could be difficult for people in rural areas or on reservations because they sometimes have to travel hours to register in person, advocates said. Married women who took their husband's name have also raised concerns about the requirement that the name on their birth certificate match their current identification. The new bill, advocates said, is also expected to be particularly challenging for Native Americans who rely on tribal cards for identification ‒ which typically don't include place of birth, as the new law requires. 'The SAVE Act is really a disastrous bill, and unfortunately it contains many poison pills," said Jacqueline De León, senior staff attorney at the Native American Rights Fund. 'As it's currently designed, it would radically disenfranchise Native American voters across the country." Republicans argue the measure is necessary to protect the integrity of elections and to make sure only citizens vote. 'In order to preserve this republic, we must uphold what it means to be able to vote in a U.S. election," Texas Rep. Chip Roy, the GOP sponsor of the bill, said in a statement. The bill faces an uphill battle in the Senate where Democrats vow to fight it. Republicans in the Senate have a 53 to 47 majority so at least seven Democrats would have to join Republicans to pass the bill and overcome the chamber's 60-vote threshold. Advocates noted that noncitizens are already not allowed to vote in federal elections. There is no evidence that that is happening in significant numbers, according to the Migration Policy Institute. Voting rights advocates said requirements in the SAVE Act would create more hurdles for people living in rural communities and on reservations who sometimes have to travel hundreds of miles to register in person. 'It's sort of an amplified dynamic of the rural voter experience and challenges to have to present in person your citizenship documents to register vote," said Sen. Alex Padilla, of California whose state he said is home to more federally recognized tribes than any other. "If you live down the street from the county courthouse, that's one thing," he said. "But if you're literally a couple of hours from the county seat with limited transportation options, it can pose a significant challenge.' De León said long trips to registrar offices are particularly problematic in Alaska where many Native communities inhabit remote locations. Some require a plane to get to them, she said. 'The fact that Native Americans aren't receiving fair access to register to county seats and to elections offices is in and of itself a problem," De León said. 'But then to require the administration to be placed at those offices means that Native Americans are now doubly disenfranchised." Among the identifications allowed under the bill are passports and tribal IDs that include the place of birth. But advocates argue many Native Americans don't have a passport and can't afford the $130 cost to get one. De León said she doesn't know of any tribal ID that includes the place of birth. 'It's sort of disingenuous to say that tribal IDs are accepted," she said. Eliza Sweren-Becker, senior counsel in the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, called it "a red herring," saying most Native voters don't have a tribal ID that would satisfy the bill requirements. 'The bill would harm all American voters," she said. "It would especially burden voters of color and it would especially burden Native voters." Many Native American elders also lack birth certificates, De León said. 'The SAVE Act preys upon the structural deficiencies in Native American communities and makes it difficult and at times impossible for them to comply," she said. Roy praised the House for passing the Republican legislation by a vote of 220 to 208, "despite the ridiculous attacks and purposeful misinformation spread about the bill." Lawmakers voted April 10 mostly along party line with four Democrats supporting the bill. In addition to proof of citizenship, the bill also would require states to remove anyone identified as a noncitizen from voter rolls. Supporters have argued that ID requirements have not stopped people from registering to vote. They point to Georgia where state election officials adopted sweeping election reforms, including requiring a photo ID to vote absentee by mail, after the 2020 election. Voting rights advocates had said the state law could disenfranchise many voters of color. 'Turnout and registration numbers show that not only were these provisions not discriminatory, but they had record registration and turnout in Georgia," said Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. More: Voters in Georgia are already lining up at the polls In March, President Donald Trump signed an executive order also calling for proof of citizenship in federal elections. The order was part of Trump's continued false claim that he lost the 2020 presidential in part because of voter fraud. "This country is so sick because of the fake elections and the bad elections, and we're going to straighten it out one way or the other," Trump said before signing the order. Advocates warn that Trump's order and the SAVE Act will discourage voting, particularly among people of color. "The executive order and the SAVE Act are really two sides of the same coin and again reflect this emerging threat that the federal government is getting into the voter suppression business, which is alarming and a dangerous sign for our democracy,' Sweren-Becker said. Contributing: Riley Beggin, Trevor Hughes Follow Deborah Berry on X at @dberrygannett and on Bluesky at @ This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: GOP's SAVE Act has 'poison pills' for Native American voters
Yahoo
08-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Consultation doesn't always equal consent
Pauly DenetclawICTUNITED NATIONS — The 24th session of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues was focused on implementing the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples — locally, nationally and globally.'At every stage, the global push for the so-called green transition has intensified demand for critical minerals, lithium, cobalt, nickel and others, many of which lie beneath sacred Indigenous lands and territories,' Aluki Kotierk, chair of the Permanent Forum, said in a speech. 'We cannot ignore (what) this threat poses to our rights, lands and way of life. Extractive activities when carried out in disregard of the right to self determination and the free, prior and informed consent of Indigenous peoples become another form of colonialism. We are not anti-development, but development must be on our terms and must be just.'An important aspect of the declaration, adopted by all 193 UN member states, is free, prior and informed consent.'It ensures that when Indigenous people sit down with a government, a company, or another third party, that they'll have all of the information they need, enough time, and really a fair opportunity to negotiate an outcome that's mutually beneficial to them and the other party,' said Kristen Carpenter, law professor and co-director of the Implementation Colorado-based project is a joint initiative between the Native American Rights Fund and the University of Colorado Law School to educate and advocate for the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Currently, the United States doesn't use this framework for decision making, opting for tribal consultation where the outcome doesn't have to include consent. However, countries who approved the declaration are required to codify it into their national laws. Native American Rights Fund and the National Congress of American Indians have been advocating for a transition to free, prior and informed leaders from the United States often don't participate in their capacity as an elected official because the nations would have to apply as a non-governmental organization, which could be seen as a diminishment of tribal sovereignty. Despite this, the largest number of tribal leaders attended this year's forum, according to Carpenter. 'I'm so happy we have more tribal leaders than ever,' Carpenter said. Tribal leaders play an important role locally, statewide and nationally. This could extend globally. 'It's important for tribal leaders to be here because you have a seat at the table,' said Joe Deere, co-chair of NCAI's international committee. 'Your voice is going to get heard. You're going to be able to communicate with other people across the United States, and now even other countries.'Over the last few years, the two national Indigenous organizations have ramped up their work internationally to advocate for the implementation of free, prior and informed consent in the United States, knowing it could take many years to actualize. 'We need to be ready to run a marathon to make that happen,' said Aaron Jones, co-chair of the international committee for the National Congress of American Indians. 'We're talking about implementing this and I know we're really in the early stages.' HistoryIn 2007, an overwhelming majority of the countries that make up the UN General Assembly voted in favor of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. It's not shocking that the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand initially voted against the legal, nonbinding declaration. (Eventually the four countries changed their position on a document that in essence states that Indigenous peoples are human beings with the right to exist in perpetuity.) The most well-known and heralded right listed in the 46 articles is free, prior and informed consent. This principle doesn't just apply to land rights, which it's often conflated with. It also applies to culture, language, food systems, intellectual property, governmental laws and landback. The phrasing is intentional with every word having a principle behind it. Free meaning that consent is given without coercion, threats, violence, manipulation or bribery. Consent is given are many examples of consent given under threat, violence or coercion in the United States. Navajo leaders signed the Treaty of 1868 with the federal government after the tribe was death marched over 400 miles from their homelands that span New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah to Bosque Redondo in eastcentral New Mexico where they were placed in a concentration camp. More than 8,000 Navajo people were forcibly kept at Bosque Redondo for three years. During that time, illness, starvation, or exposure took the lives of over 2,000 Navajo people. During the termination era, the federal government passed the Indian Relocation Act of 1956. It would coerce thousands of Indigenous people to leave their homelands with the promise of job opportunities, more pay, and housing. Instead, many were left without work, training or housing. Prior means that Indigenous communities and nations have adequate time to go through the decision-making process well-before governments, companies or other third parties have made a decision. The third word of the phrase, informed, means that Indigenous nations must be completely and fully informed about the environmental, health and social impacts of a planned project. 'For example, in the Philippines, when there was a mining project in one area, and the community said, 'We want to know the details of the project. So if you don't share to us the full information of the project, we cannot come out with an informed decision. We need to know everything,'' said Joan Carling, a renowned Indigenous rights activist and environmentalist. The documentation has to include all the information about the proposed project including size, purpose, scope and time length. Most importantly, the information must be shared in a language the community is most comfortable with, and in a format that aligns with the community's needs. 'What can be the positive and negative impacts of the project? So, it should be complete and accurate information,' said Carling, Kankanaey tribe in the Philippines codified free, prior and informed consent in the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act passed in 1997. A year later, Ecuador passed a new constitution that recognized Indigenous peoples right to free, prior and informed consent. In 2011, Colombia's Constitutional Court, which acts much like the Supreme Court, made a historic ruling that recognized the decision-making framework as a human right for Indigenous peoples. However, its full and fair implementation hasn't come without is a big difference between consultation and consent. Consultation in the United States doesn't have to include consent but tribal nations have made great strides in this area. Although not required, it's often a goal for the federal government to reach a consensus or agreement with a tribal nation. Historically, this hasn't always been the case. In 1948, the federal government approved the Garrison Dam that flooded 152,000 acres of Mandan Hidatsa and Arikara land in North Dakota, despite objections from the tribe. It forced the relocation of 325 families from the tribe. Last year, a judge ruled against Arizona-based tribes, Tohono O'odham Nation and San Carlos Apache Tribe, in a suit that was challenging the construction of the SunZia transmission line in southern Arizona's San Pedro Valley. The line passes through an area that holds historic, cultural and spiritual significance for the nations. The two tribes have been fighting its construction for years, advocating that it be built alongside land that has already been developed. It crosses 'one of the most intact cultural landscapes in the Southwest,' a 2024 lawsuit by the Tohono O'odham Nation stated. The project was a cornerstone of former President Joe Biden's green energy agenda. 'The SunZia Transmission Project will accelerate our nation's transition to a clean energy economy by unlocking renewable resources, creating jobs, lowering costs, and boosting local economies,' Deb Haaland, former Interior Secretary, said in a 2023 press release. 'Through historic investments from President Biden's Investing in America agenda, the Interior Department is helping build modern, resilient climate infrastructure that protects our communities from the worsening impacts of climate change.'The case was appealed to the Court of the Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The panel of judges heard oral arguments on March 26. An opinion has yet to be released. Adopting the principles of free, prior and informed consent could help to alleviate legal issues like this. The federal government and companies could avoid lengthy and costly legal battles by engaging in this process. 'One thing we see over and over again, and I'm sure everyone in this room is aware that projects will come in, including now renewable energy projects, there will be human rights violations, violations of the right to (free, prior and informed consent), land rights. People will exercise their right to protest and raise concerns about those harms,' said Christine Dodsen, co-lead of the Civic Freedoms & Human Rights Defenders Programme. 'Then there will be a crackdown against human rights defenders, either directly by the company, by governments, and that will then lead... to financial risks, legal risks for the company. For business actors, this model could lead to reduced risks, and a competitive advantage.'The United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues will release a report with recommendations, to the United Nations and member states, based on interventions given during the two-week event. It will be released sometime this year. The forum concluded May 2. Our stories are worth telling. Our stories are worth sharing. Our stories are worth your support. Contribute $5 or $10 today to help ICT carry out its critical mission. Sign up for ICT's free newsletter.
Yahoo
05-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Graduation Regalia: More Native students get green light to wear tribal regalia this year
Renata BirkenbuelSpecial to ICTMore Native students than ever before will graduate this year with regalia on their traditional caps and gowns as a growing number of states pass laws that allow beadwork, feathers, painting and other cultural years of facing possible removal from graduation ceremonies or confiscation of their caps or gowns, students in at least 20 states have now received official approval from their lawmakers to celebrate their heritage while they collect their INDIGENOUS JOURNALISM. 'Graduation is a hard-won, major life accomplishment,' said Matthew L. Campbell, deputy director of the Native American Rights Fund. 'No Native student should have to choose between their right to wear tribal regalia and attending their high school graduation ceremony.'New Mexico is the latest state to enact graduation protections for Native students. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed into law Senate Bill 163 on March 19, granting leeway for students to express their cultural and spiritual heritage at school chambers of the New Mexico Legislature gave unanimous support to the new legislation, which specifically prohibits school boards and charter schools from preventing Native students from wearing culturally significant clothing, accessories and objects during graduation new law went into effect immediately, just in time for this year's graduation ceremonies.'This legislation represents our commitment to honoring and respecting the rich cultural heritage of New Mexico's Native communities,' Grisham said at the signing. 'Every student deserves to celebrate their academic achievements in a way that honors their identity and traditions.'Nineteen other states now have similar laws, according to the Native American Rights Fund, including Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, and Washington. Regalia bills are also pending in Wisconsin.'Whether an eagle feather or plume, beadwork, sealskin cap, moccasins, or other forms of traditional dress, tribal regalia plays a unique role, spiritually and culturally, for graduating Indigenous students,' according to a statement from the American Civil Liberties Union.'Disruptions'The legislative victories have come after long-fought battles to allow regalia at an eagle feather or plume on graduate graduation caps, for example, can represent honesty, truth, majesty, strength, courage, wisdom, power, and freedom among many of the 574 federally recognized tribes in the United school officials, however, have maintained the adornments cause 'disruptions' for graduation ceremonies, or violate dress codes. In 2024, several incidents upended graduation for Indigenous students. In Tacoma, Washington, a public school student was told she couldn't collect her diploma wearing a sacred button blanket that she had been given by her tribe. The student filed suit in late in Farmington, New Mexico, a school official confiscated a student's graduation cap that had been beaded around the rim and included an eagle feather. The incident sparked outrage from the Navajo Nation.A Native student in Oklahoma also sued after officials tried to take an eagle plume from her cap during the ceremony. And in Liberty Hill, Texas, near Austin, a Navajo student was told she could not graduate with purple beading and a feather on her graduation school principals last year in southern Utah tried to bar two Native students from wearing forms of tribal regalia at their graduation ceremonies, and in Montana, a school administrator prevented a student from wearing a graduation cap that had been painted with a Native design by his turmoil can cause unnecessary stresses for Native students who should be celebrating their big Adams-Cornell, a Choctaw Nation parent and a board member of the ACLU Oklahoma, said in a national 2023 ACLU video on tribal regalia that the first time she tried on her own Choctaw dress was pivotal to her identity.'I feel the gravity as an Indigenous person to have all those things stripped from us, to have assimilation policies and boarding schools,' Adams-Cornell says in the video. 'And there is this incredible time that we get to live in right now to reclaim and restore Indigeneity. I feel that if people understood the meaning behind these items, they can understand why it's important that our kids have the opportunity to wear them at graduation.'Her daughter, college graduate Isabella Blu Aiukli Cornell, connects regalia to storytelling.'Representing yourself and your culture is an honor and everybody should be able to do it,' Cornell said in the video. 'Our regalia has stories in it. It tells us who we are as people.' Resources aboundResources are available for students to learn about their rights in their state or local Native American Rights Fund posts a guide for wearing eagle feathers at graduation, and school personnel may also access a Native American Rights Fund guide on how to handle the wearing of often advises students and their families on regalia questions, especially as commencements approach. Every year, concerned families inquire about possible bans on wearing eagle feathers or traditional outfits at graduation American Civil Liberties Union also provides guidance on the issue of regalia, with a 'Know Your Rights: Tribal Regalia' guide on its Albert, Native Forward Scholars Fund chief executive and Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, said wearing regalia is one way to increase visibility of Natives in higher its founding 50 years ago, Native Forward Scholars Fund has awarded $400 million in scholarships and provided follow-up services for more than 22,000 students from more than 500 tribes in all 50 states. Recipients include those studying in undergraduate, graduate and professional degrees programs. Education remains keyEducation remains key to broadening the understanding of public displays of Native pride and recognition, said Cheryl Crazy Bull, Sicangu Lakota and president of the American Indian College Fund.'Laws such as those passed by the New Mexico legislature affirm Native students' right to celebrate their cultural identities during events — graduations, convocations, ceremonies — that are also a time when Native people reclaim education,' said Crazy Bull, otherwise known as Wacinyanpi Win, translated as 'They Depend on Her.''Our historical experience with boarding schools and removal from our communities means we are still striving for that reclamation,' Crazy Bull said. 'For Native people, education is an opportunity and a celebration.'As the coalition of pro-regalia states has increased, so has school May 2024, a feather-tying ceremony at a joint commencement of Bismarck Public Schools and Mandan Public Schools celebrated Indigenous graduates' achievements and their protected rights to wear eagle feathers and tribal regalia.'The College Fund joins with Native Scholars Fund, AISES, and Cobell Scholarships to also celebrate students' education achievements through our online graduation walk,' added Crazy Bull, who encourages recipients to share their experiences. 'All graduates can join the celebration by posting their photos and videos to their social media channels with the hashtags #NativePathways and #EducationIsTheAnswer.'Josett Monette, Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians and secretary of New Mexico Indian Affairs, wants the New Mexico law to ease student fears. She is also the mother of three public school graduates.'I'm hopeful that this just makes one of those steps a little bit easier for students.' Monette said. 'To be able to say, I know I get to wear my moccasins if I want to. I know I can wear my traditional dress if I want to, or I can wear my traditional slacks or a ribbon or whatever it may be if I want to.' Our stories are worth telling. Our stories are worth sharing. Our stories are worth your support. Contribute today to help ICT carry out its critical mission. Sign up for ICT's free newsletter.
Yahoo
10-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Tribes, Native students sue feds over education cuts
Mar. 10—A coalition of tribal nations and students is suing the federal government over major cuts to a pair of colleges and a federal agency serving Native American students. The staffing cuts, part of President Donald Trump's effort to reduce the federal workforce, have slashed basic services on the campuses of Haskell Indian Nations University in Kansas and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute, known as SIPI, in New Mexico. The lawsuit says the feds failed to notify or consult with tribal nations prior to making the cuts. The lawsuit notes that those schools — as well as the federal Bureau of Indian Education — are part of a system that fulfills the federal government's legal obligation to provide education for Native people. Tribal nations secured that right in a series of treaties in exchange for conceding land. "The United States government has legal obligations to Tribal Nations that they agreed to in treaties and have been written into federal law," Jacqueline De León, staff attorney with the Native American Rights Fund, the legal group leading the lawsuit, said in a statement announcing the case. "The abrupt and drastic changes that happened since February, without consultation or even pre-notification, are completely illegal." Three tribal nations and five Native students have joined the lawsuit. Asked about the case, federal officials told media outlets they do not comment on pending litigation. According to Haskell student Ella Bowen, cuts to custodial staff have left bathrooms with overflowing trash cans and no toilet paper. SIPI student Kaiya Jade Brown said that school's campus has suffered from power outages because of a lack of maintenance workers. Both schools lost roughly a quarter of their staff last month after Trump and the Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency task force ordered major cuts across a slew of federal agencies. While the schools have since been able to hire back some instructional staff, "[i]t is not even close to enough," Native American Rights Fund Deputy Director Matthew Campbell said in the statement. Thirty-four courses at Haskell lost their instructors in February, according to the statement. Some students have reported delays in their financial aid, and SIPI students are dealing with brown, unsafe tap water, with repairs put on hold due to the cuts, the statement said. And the school did not have enough faculty to administer midterm exams. The Pueblo of Isleta; the Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation; and the Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes are suing the feds. "Despite having a treaty obligation to provide educational opportunities to Tribal students, the federal government has long failed to offer adequate services," Cheyenne and Arapaho Tribes Lieutenant Governor Hershel Gorham said in the statement. "Just when the Bureau of Indian Education was taking steps to fix the situation, these cuts undermined all those efforts. These institutions are precious to our communities, we won't sit by and watch them fail." Stateline reporter Alex Brown can be reached at [email protected]. YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.
