[Editor’s note: This is the second article in a
three-part series focusing on continued improvements to cross-court
understanding between state and tribal courts through education and
collaboration.]
The first
article in this series discussed how tribal courts can operate differently
from state courts, the overlap in child support responsibilities between tribal
and state courts, and profiled two tribal court chief judges who collaborate
with nearby friend of the court (FOC) offices.
Retired Michigan Supreme Court
Justice Michael Cavanagh said, “Our state courts can benefit greatly from
becoming familiar with tribal court procedures and practices and the
peacemaking model.”[1]
Following that wisdom, this
article delves deeper into how tribal courts interact with their litigants and
then explores one example of a strong partnership between a tribal court and a
state court on child support matters.
Procedural Justice[2] for Tribal Court
Litigants
Chief Judge Michael Petoskey[3]
presides in the tribal court of the Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians community
and explains his vision for the design of its tribal court. “Because I’ve
been on the bench for over 30 years as a tribal court judge in different tribal
communities in Michigan, I am in a leadership position to develop justice tools
and systems that are culturally based and are meaningful to native people.”
He continued, “Very early on in
my career, I was chief judge of my own tribal community. A young man walked in,
tossed his head back toward the ceiling, rolled his eyes, and said, ‘This looks
like a white man’s court.’ That set
me out on a journey to think about how tribal courts ought to look, how they
ought to reflect who we are culturally.”
He says that today the Pokagon Band
Tribal Court feels informal, friendly, and approachable. “When you walk into
our courtroom, you can see that you are in a … (chuckles) … well, you are not in a state court. It projects culture,” he shared.
 |
| The courtroom of the Pokagon Band Tribal Court displays cultural elements. |
The literal scent in the
courthouse comes from sage “smudging,” a native ceremonial process meant to rid
the environment of negativity and create an environment to start afresh.
Chief Judge Petoskey explained,
“Every Monday we begin the work week with a smudging, and then also we do a
smudging if we need to throughout the work week for particular matters.”
In addition, litigants and
attorneys may use the sage before a proceeding, if they desire. “If we have a
matter where we know people are going to be emotional, we will do a smudging.
The litigants may request it,” he explained.
 |
| The "Seven Grandfathers," or "Seven Teachings," artwork displayed in the Pokagon Band Tribal Courtroom. |
Another thing that sets Chief
Judge Petoskey’s tribal court apart from state courts is the Native American artwork
that decorates the court building and courtroom. One piece depicts the “Seven Grandfathers”[4]
– the traditional cultural values of the Pokagon Band, which Chief Judge
Petoskey says he frequently references during hearings. He describes another
courtroom piece, titled “Sacred Justice,” as “a visual representation of our
obligation to ensure justice.”
 |
| "Sacred Justice" artwork displayed in the Pokagon Band Tribal Courtroom. |
Shape is another noticeable
difference, explains Chief Judge Petoskey. “As we plan our new court building,
our new courtroom will be completely circular because we have long recognized
the power of the circle.”
Even interactions between tribal
judges and attorneys occur within a circle. (It is worth noting that retired
Justice Cavanagh had a great deal of input when the Michigan Hall of Justice
was being constructed, and influenced the circular shape of the Supreme Court’s
courtroom to incorporate themes from tribal courts into the building.)
Before conducting hearings, Chief
Judge Petoskey meets with attorneys around a circular table in the judge’s
chambers. For family law matters, they engage in problem-solving by discussing what
has been going on in the case, focusing on the individual situation and needs of
each parent and of the children, and attempt to reach a solution.
“This problem-solving meeting is
a much different practice for most attorneys,” said Chief Judge Petoskey, “and
it is vital to the strength of tribal communities.”
He elaborated, “Our communities
are small, and the adversarial process – where people are testifying against
each other in an attempt to win their case – is very destructive to
relationships that do not disappear when people leave the court. We may work in
the next building or live just down the block, or our parents might have been
friends, or our grandparents.” When one tribal relationship is destroyed, it
can impact the tribal community for generations.
Chief Judge Petoskey is proud of
his court’s “commitment to community” and method of coming together to focus on
identifying issues, developing a plan for making change, and solving problems
in a cooperative fashion.
This process, along with the
design, décor, and participatory cultural practices, welcomes litigants and
provides transparency about the court’s values. The Pokagon Band has hosted
Michigan Supreme Court justices and state court judges to share this approach
to achieving justice. Chief Judge Petoskey invites any court interested in
visiting or learning more to contact the Pokagon Band Court Administrator
Stephen Rambeaux (Stephen.Rambeaux@pokagonband-nsn.gov).
Tribal State Court Partnership
Chief Judge Petoskey and his
court administrator, Stephen Rambeaux, recognize that state courts may have
better tools at their disposal to effectively handle certain matters. Many
tribal court systems are still in their formative years.
Rambeaux relayed that when the
Pokagon Band was developing its divorce code a few years ago and discussing how
to address child support matters, the tribe did not have all of the answers. He
remembers important lingering questions, such as, “How do we impute income to
someone when we do not know their earning history?” and “How do we enforce
child support payment on someone if they are not within the territorial range
of the Band?”
“We simply went to Cass County’s Chief
Judge Susan Dobrich and Carol Bealor [Circuit Court Administrator and Friend of
the Court Director] and wanted to learn from them,” says Chief Judge Petoskey.
 |
| (Left to right) Pokagon Band Court Administrator Stephen Rambeaux, Pokagon Band Chief Judge Michael Petoskey, 43rd Circuit Court Chief Judge Susan Dobrich, and 43rd Circuit Court Administrator and Friend of the Court Director Carol Bealor. |
The two judges were first
acquainted at a new judge training years earlier, and they continue working
together on the Michigan Tribal State Federal Judicial Forum.[5]
At the initial meeting, both
courts shared information about their past domestic relations work. Cass
County’s 43rd Circuit Court discussed topics ranging from making child support
recommendations to enforcing payment of child support. The Pokagon Band Tribal
Court provided figures and graphs illustrating the quantity and value of child
support withholdings from tribal members and employees of tribal enterprises.
Chief Judge Dobrich recognized
the value of the tribe enforcing so many of her court’s child support orders
and was happy to return the favor. “They have the legal authority to do
divorces, but they don’t have the legal mechanism to handle the child support
like we do, because we receive federal dollars under Title IV-D of the Social
Security Act,” explains Chief Judge Dobrich.[6]
“We have worked out an arrangement where the tribe handles the divorce, but
we’ll handle the child support enforcement for them because we have the
software, computers, and funding under Title IV-D, as we’re part of the state
system and can do so.”
Rambeaux explains that the
Pokagon Band’s domestic code was written to address the need to calculate child
support and to allow, but not require, the court to follow the Michigan Child
Support Formula.
Today, the two courts work
together consistently to achieve the best child support outcomes. The Pokagon
Band Tribal Court makes referrals to the 43rd Circuit’s FOC for recommendations
regarding child support obligations, for enforcement of support orders beyond
the Band’s capabilities, and for mediation services. Those recommendations are
then considered for entry by the Pokagon Band Tribal Court.
Working Together on Shared
Goals
According to Chief Judge
Petoskey, “Tribes feel very strongly about parents supporting children, and the
obligation to support children. We want child support paid.”
By working together, Chief Judge
Petoskey and Chief Judge Dobrich are able to better accomplish this goal for
their respective constituencies. Chief Judge Petoskey encourages state courts
and other tribes to reach out to one another and develop similar partnerships.
The last article in this series will focus on specific areas for
improvement in cooperation between state child support agencies and tribal courts.
[1]
Michigan Supreme Court. “Michigan’s Judiciary Success Stories: How Tribal,
State, and Federal Courts Are Collaborating to Benefit Michigan Families” (November
2017), at 24. (http://courts.mi.gov/Administration/SCAO/Documents/Tribal-State-Fed%20Success%20Stories%2011-3_FINAL.pdf.)
[2]
Procedural justice is the concept of fairness in the process which determines
the result to be just or fair, rather than basing fairness solely on the
outcome itself. Core principles of procedural justice include voice,
neutrality, respect, and trust.
[3]
The first article in this series, “Putting Our Minds Together for Our
Children,” includes a profile of Chief Judge Petoskey (http://michildsupportpundit.blogspot.com/2017/12/putting-our-minds-together-for-our.html).
[4]
The “Seven Grandfathers,” or Anishinaabe traditional cultural values, include:
respect, love, truth, bravery, wisdom, generosity, and humility (http://ojibwe.net/projects/prayers-teachings/the-gifts-of-the-seven-grandfathers).
