On Second Thought

Ten years ago, a group of American Indians filed a class action lawsuit against the federal government over alleged mishandling of more than $100 billion worth of royalties generated from their land since 1887. Last week, a U.S. District court ordered the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to pay $7 million dollars for the plaintiff’s legal expenses. This order stemmed from a petition by the plaintiffs that the government (whom they are suing) pay for the costs of the lawsuit. They had originally requested $14 million.

The Bureau is of course a part of the federal government so essentially; the BIA is being sued by the same people they are supposed to be helping.

That, by itself seems pretty ridiculous. I mean, the defendant in this case has been ordered to pay for the lawyers suing them just so that they can continue to sue them. Is that really fair? No judgment in this case has been made yet, but the defendant is already being penalized. They are being required to fund a lawsuit against them that could ultimately cost them $100 billion dollars. That’s $100 billion of your money as a taxpayer! Essentially you are funding this tremendous lawsuit that could ultimately cost you more money in taxes.

Of course that’s the annoying and potentially infuriating part of the story. Now here’s the funny part: I’m sure that most people have heard the saying “You shouldn’t bite the hand that feeds you.” Well, apparently the plaintiffs in this case didn’t think about that. Since being ordered to pay the $7 million in legal fees for the plaintiffs, the BIA has announced significant program cuts in order to come up with the money. Among the cuts are $2 million in funding for lawyers providing tribal work, which seems ironically justified. The plaintiffs of course were shocked that the BIA would have to cut program funding in order to come up with the $7 million. “This is totally unreal”, said lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell. Plaintiffs also said the funding cuts were “devious and deceptive”.

I don’t really see anything devious or deceptive about the funding cuts. This isn’t the Treasury Department after all, the BIA can’t print it’s own money and they had to come up with it somewhere. The BIA has a budget and certain amount of money available to it. If they have to pay for an unanticipated expense, then much like an individual citizen, they are going to have to reduce their spending on other things. Of course I’m sure the decision to cut legal funding was at least partly a “shot” at the plaintiffs.

I wonder if the plaintiffs are having second thoughts about their petition to get their legal fees paid. I can just picture someone, somewhere banging his head against the wall and saying, “Why didn’t I see that coming?” All of this makes you wonder just what the BIA will cut if they come out on the losing side of the $100 billion lawsuit.

Date Added: 05-02-2006