Cobell v. Kempthorne - New Judge Gets Sharply Different Plans for Resolving Indian Trust Case
WASHINGTON
U.S. District Judge James Robertson held his first hearing this week on federal government's Indian Trust operations and got sharply divided opinions on what to do with the 10-1/2-year-old class action lawsuit over the trust program.
Lawyers for the Indian plaintiffs urged the judge Wednesday to set the case for a four-month trial this summer on whether the government can actually conduct its long-promised accounting of Individual Indian money accounts.
"It's time for final judgment", argued attorney Dennis M. Gingold, citing suggestions by an appeals court and the chief judge of the district court that both sides should attempt to settle the case promptly.
But a Justice Department lawyer pleaded for the judge to do essentially nothing.
Attorney Robert Kirschman said the judge should do is allow the Interior Department to continue its long-running effort to rebuild records of the hundreds of thousands of trust records. "It is not appropriate to hold a trial at this time", he said.
The judge noted that the government by its own numbers had completed reviews on less than 10 percent of the trust accounts.
"How long is going to take to get this done?" he asked Kirschman.
"I cannot give you a date, your honor", the Justice lawyer responded.
Judge Robertson, who was recently ordered to take charge of the case, did not indicate which course he would take during a status hearing on the Cobell versus Kempthorne litigation. But he promised "that is not my intent to dawdle with this case."
The hearing came as lawyers for the Indians filed two petitions with the U.S. Supreme Court. One of those requests that the justices review the July decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that removed the case from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth.
The other petition asked the high court to consider another appeals court order that lifted an injunction that Judge Lamberth had imposed on the Interior Department's notoriously weak computer systems. Those computers hold sensitive Indian Trust data and that is at risk of "catastrophic" damage, Gingold said.
Judge Robertson noted that he was aware of the Supreme Court request to return the case to Lamberth. At one point, Robertson referred to himself as "the acting judge."
Gingold quickly dissented. "We don't view you as the acting judge," he told Robertson.
"No one knows what the Supreme Court is going to do," said Gingold. He urged the judge to take strong, immediate steps to resolve the class action lawsuit, which was filed in mid 1996.
"Further delays will only exacerbate the problems," Gingold said.
The judge said he would hold a second status hearing on the case in January. At that time, Robertson said he will delve into the case in greater detail.
For additional information, please go to http://www.indiantrust.com
Indian Trust
Please also see the Indian Trust series in our International Law section.
WASHINGTON
U.S. District Judge James Robertson held his first hearing this week on federal government's Indian Trust operations and got sharply divided opinions on what to do with the 10-1/2-year-old class action lawsuit over the trust program.
Lawyers for the Indian plaintiffs urged the judge Wednesday to set the case for a four-month trial this summer on whether the government can actually conduct its long-promised accounting of Individual Indian money accounts.
"It's time for final judgment", argued attorney Dennis M. Gingold, citing suggestions by an appeals court and the chief judge of the district court that both sides should attempt to settle the case promptly.
But a Justice Department lawyer pleaded for the judge to do essentially nothing.
Attorney Robert Kirschman said the judge should do is allow the Interior Department to continue its long-running effort to rebuild records of the hundreds of thousands of trust records. "It is not appropriate to hold a trial at this time", he said.
The judge noted that the government by its own numbers had completed reviews on less than 10 percent of the trust accounts.
"How long is going to take to get this done?" he asked Kirschman.
"I cannot give you a date, your honor", the Justice lawyer responded.
Judge Robertson, who was recently ordered to take charge of the case, did not indicate which course he would take during a status hearing on the Cobell versus Kempthorne litigation. But he promised "that is not my intent to dawdle with this case."
The hearing came as lawyers for the Indians filed two petitions with the U.S. Supreme Court. One of those requests that the justices review the July decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that removed the case from U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth.
The other petition asked the high court to consider another appeals court order that lifted an injunction that Judge Lamberth had imposed on the Interior Department's notoriously weak computer systems. Those computers hold sensitive Indian Trust data and that is at risk of "catastrophic" damage, Gingold said.
Judge Robertson noted that he was aware of the Supreme Court request to return the case to Lamberth. At one point, Robertson referred to himself as "the acting judge."
Gingold quickly dissented. "We don't view you as the acting judge," he told Robertson.
"No one knows what the Supreme Court is going to do," said Gingold. He urged the judge to take strong, immediate steps to resolve the class action lawsuit, which was filed in mid 1996.
"Further delays will only exacerbate the problems," Gingold said.
The judge said he would hold a second status hearing on the case in January. At that time, Robertson said he will delve into the case in greater detail.
For additional information, please go to http://www.indiantrust.com
Indian Trust
Please also see the Indian Trust series in our International Law section.