The Obama admiminstration agreed to settle the Cobell v. Salazar suit in December 2009. At the time, it looked like passsage would be swift. Now, it will be close to nine months since the settlement agreement was signed in the long-running Indian trust land suit filed by Elouise Cobell in 1996.
After six extended deadlines, it’s possible that the Cobell v. Salazar suit might be extended, again, until September.
Here’s what the National Law Journal reports on Aug. 6:
Dennis Gingold, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, including lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell of Montana, said in an interview today that he and his clients are considering whether to give Congress more time to act. The proposed settlement needs congressional authorization, and lawyers in the case have set at least six deadlines for that to happen since they came to terms in December 2009.
“We have to have some discussions with the administration about how this is going to proceed going forward, and we haven’t done that,” said Gingold (pictured above), a Washington solo practitioner. “If it looks like we actually have a sincere and honest commitment to get it done it September, then it would be foolish not to extend” the deadline, he said. The plaintiffs’ alternative would be to abandon the settlement and either negotiate a new one or return to litigation against the government.
The House of Representatives has twice given its approval to the settlement, including the authorization in broader spending bills, but the settlement has gotten caught up in the Senate. Lawmakers need to find other savings in the federal budget to satisfy self-imposed debt rules, and some Republicans want to impose a $50 million cap on attorney fees.
With the annual August congressional recess beginning today, lawmakers will not have another chance to act until mid-September.
Jodi Rave
