Alaska
A federal judge ruled that Alaska tribes may put land into trust. Now what?
Last week, a federal judge in Anchorage ruled that tribes in Alaska may put land into trust, essentially allowing tribes to create “Indian Country” in the state. That’s something that had nearly been done away with since the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act took effect 53 years ago.
Alaska Beacon reporter James Brooks sat down with KTOO’s Clarise Larson to talk about what the ruling really means, and why it matters.
Listen:
This transcript has been edited lightly for clarity.
James Brooks: This matters a lot because it allows Alaska Native tribes within the state to put land in the federal trust, protecting it from sale, from give away from anything that they don’t want — effectively. It’s a form of long-term protection that places this land under tribal law, rather than state or local law. The main idea is that putting land into trust is something that Alaska tribes haven’t been able to do since the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in the 1970s.
Clarise Larson: What is the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, and why is it influencing what is happening today?
James Brooks: We know that Alaska Natives have lived in Alaska for 10s of 1000s of years, since time immemorial, as the phrase goes. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act back in the 1970s was designed to settle what’s known as Aboriginal land claims, the idea that folks have been living here for so long, they should have title or right to the land around them — the land that they have used.
The Settlement Act was designed to settle those Aboriginal claims to land. But what it did was it didn’t give land to tribes, instead, it created corporations to hold that land. And those corporations have rights, but they’re not sovereign governments. And in the decades since then, there have been plenty of people who are unhappy with that result. Even though corporations received millions of acres of land and millions of dollars. It didn’t answer all of the problems that Alaska Natives have had with the current system. And so by putting land into trust, you can put land under the authority of the sovereign tribal governments allowing them to exert tribal law on that land.
Clarise Larson: In Alaska, who is going to be impacted the most by this?
James Brooks: It has the potential to impact virtually everyone in the state. There are almost 230 federally recognized tribes in the state. And until now, most of those tribes have had very small land bases. Now, tribes can take a greater influence in how land is administered here. And say, for example, Tlingit and Haida’s situation here in Juneau, they’re seeking to put a fairly notable part of downtown Juneau into trust. And that has the potential to impact all of the people who live around that plot of land.
Clarise Larson: But, the ruling wasnt exactly cut and dry, right? Explain to me some of the intricacies of this particular ruling.
James Brooks: The ruling this week matters because it says that tribes can do this, but it wasn’t a complete win for the federal government or for Tlingit and Haida. Judge [Sharon] Gleason, who gave the ruling said that the process used in the particular case that was before her court was flawed and needs to be started over.
That while tribes and the federal government can do this process, the process that was used in the case under question wasn’t correct. So Tlingit and Haida is going to have to go back to the federal government, they’re going to have to restart this process. And it might take a little bit for that to happen. But in the end, the most important thing is that Tlingit and Haida, and other tribes will be able to do this process.
Clarise Larson: Why did the State of Alaska sue in the first place?
James Brooks: The state of Alaska through various governors, and various legislatures, has always been somewhat skeptical of tribal sovereignty of tribal land claims. And, in challenging tribes’ ability to put land into trust, this latest lawsuit was following in the state’s historical pattern. Because the state government, state governors feel they have a responsibility for all their state residents. And they worry that allowing tribes to put land into trust could create lots of patches of varying jurisdictions that might deprive different residents of their rights.
Clarise Larson: So, what’s next?
James Brooks: This decision could end up getting appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, it could end up reaching the US Supreme Court. And we could see changes if there’s a new presidential administration as well.
Policies on Native land claims and in putting landed the trust have varied from presidential administration to presidential administration. And so we could see that change as well. While this is an important step, it’s not the last word by any means.
Alaska
Alaska’s voter roll transfer: Republicans bash hearing questioning if lieutenant governor broke the law
JUNEAU, Alaska (KTUU) – A legislative hearing into the legality of Alaska’s voter roll transfer to the federal government ended in partisan accusations Monday, with one Republican calling it a “set-up” and others saying it was unnecessary, while Democrats defended it as needed oversight.
“Andrew (Gray) and the committee has a bias. I mean, that much is obvious from watching it,” Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, told Alaska’s News Source walking out of the hearing before it gaveled out. “Most of the testimony was slanted against the state and against the federal government.”
The House State Affairs and Judiciary committees met jointly Monday to hear testimony about whether Dahlstrom violated the law when she transferred the entirety of Alaska’s voter rolls to the federal government.
Rep. Steve St. Clair, R-Wasilla, agreed with his Big Lake counterpart that the hearing was unnecessary.
“I think we’re speculating on what the intent of the DOJ is and I believe we need to wait and see,” he said.
Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage and chair of the House Judiciary Committee, pushed back when told of his Republican colleagues’ reaction.
“I think that I went above and beyond to try to include everybody,” Gray said as he left the meeting. “If people are saying that if the Obama administration had asked for the unredacted voter rolls from Alaska, that all these Republicans around here would have just been like, ‘oh, take it all. Take all of our information.’
“That is not true. That is absolutely not true,” Gray added.
Rep. Ted Eischeid, D-Anchorage, backed his House majority colleague, questioning whether Republicans would have preferred if the topic not be addressed at all.
“The minority folks on the committee had a chance to ask questions,” he said. “I think this is a meeting we needed to have. Alaskans have asked for it. I think there’s still a lot of unanswered questions. So shedding light on the state’s actions, that’s bias?”
Dahlstrom did not attend the hearing. Gray said she was invited multiple times but cited scheduling conflicts. The lieutenant governor oversees the Alaska Division of Elections under state law.
In her most recent public statement — published Feb. 25 on her gubernatorial campaign website, not through her official office — Dahlstrom defended the voter roll transfer, saying the agreement with the DOJ was “lawful, limited” and that Alaska retains full authority over its voter rolls.
“The DOJ cannot remove a single voter from our rolls,” she wrote. “Its role is limited to identifying potential issues, such as duplicate registrations or individuals who may have moved or passed away.”
Representatives from the state’s Department of Law and Division of Elections both testified in defense of Dahlstrom’s decision. Rachel Witty, the Department of Law’s director of legal services, told the committee the state viewed the DOJ’s purview.
“The DOJ’s enforcement authority is quite broad,” Witty said. “And so, we interpreted their request as being used to evaluate and enforce HAVA compliance.”
HAVA — the Help America Vote Act — is a federal law that sets election administration standards for states.
Lawmakers also heard from an assortment of outside witnesses who largely questioned the legality of Dahlstrom’s actions, including former Lt. Gov. Loren Leman, who served under Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski, and former Attorney General Bruce Botelho, who served under Democratic Gov. Tony Knowles.
The Documents: A Months-Long Timeline
As part of the hearing, the committee released months’ worth of documents between the Department of Justice — led by Attorney General Pam Bondi — and Dahlstrom’s office, detailing the effort to transfer Alaska’s voter rolls over to Washington.
The DOJ first asked Dahlstrom to release the voter rolls in July of last year, citing the 1993 National Voter Registration Act, which requires states to allow federal inspection of “official lists of eligible voters.”
Dahlstrom agreed to release the records in August, providing a list of voters designated as “inactive” and “non-citizens,” along with their voting records and the statewide voter registration list — but it did not include what the DOJ wanted.
“As the Attorney General requested, the electronic copy of the statewide [voter registration list] must contain all fields,” reads an email sent 10 days after Dahlstrom agreed to release the data, “including the registrant’s full name, date of birth, residential address, his or her state driver’s license number or the last four digits of the registrant’s social security number.”
Dahlstrom agreed to provide the full details months later, in December, citing a state statute that permits sharing confidential information with a federal agency if it uses “the information only for governmental purposes authorized under law.” Those purposes, she wrote in the email, are to “test, analyze and assess the State’s compliance with federal laws.”
“I attach some significance to the fact that it took the State … nearly four months to respond to the Department of Justice’s demand,” former AG Botelho told the committee.
That same day, Dahlstrom, Alaska Division of Elections Director Carol Beecher and DOJ Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon signed a memorandum of understanding governing how the data could be accessed, used, and protected.
Dahlstrom’s office publicly announced the transfer nine days after the MOU was signed — nearly six months after the DOJ first made its request.
“Alaska is committed to the integrity of our elections and to complying with applicable law,” Dahlstrom said in the December statement. “Upon receiving the DOJ’s request, the Division of Elections, in consultation with the Department of Law, provided the voter registration list in accordance with federal requirements and state authority, while ensuring appropriate safeguards for sensitive information.”
A 10-page legal analysis from legislative counsel Andrew Dunmire, requested by House Majority Whip Rep. Zack Fields, D-Anchorage, concluded that the DOJ’s demand defied legal bounds.
“The DOJ’s request for state voter data is unprecedented,” Dunmire’s analysis states, adding that the legal justification the DOJ used to demand access to the data has never been applied this way before.
“Multiple states refused DOJ’s request, which has resulted in litigation that is now working its way through federal courts across the country,” he adds.
The Senate holds an identical hearing Wednesday, when its State Affairs and Judiciary committees take up the same questions.
See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com
Copyright 2026 KTUU. All rights reserved.
Alaska
Alaska Air National Guard rescues injured snowmachiner near Cooper Landing
JOINT BASE ELMENDORF-RICHARDSON, Alaska – Alaska Air National Guard personnel conducted a rescue mission Saturday, Feb. 21, after receiving a request for assistance from the Alaska State Troopers through the Alaska Rescue Coordination Center.
The mission was initiated to recover an injured snowmachiner in the Cooper Landing area, approximately 60 air miles south of Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson. The Alaska Air National Guard accepted the mission, located the individual, and transported them to Providence Alaska Medical Center in Anchorage for further medical care.
The mission marked the first search and rescue operation conducted by the 210th Rescue Squadron using the HH-60W Jolly Green II, the Air Force’s newest combat rescue helicopter, which is replacing the older HH-60G Pave Hawk. Guardian Angels assigned to the 212th Rescue Squadron were also aboard the aircraft and assisted in the recovery of the injured individual.
Good Samaritans, who were on the ground at the accident site, deployed a signal flare, that helped the helicopter crew visually locate the injured individual in the heavily wooded area.
Due to the mountainous terrain, dense tree cover, and deep snow in the area, the helicopter was unable to land near the patient. The aircrew conducted a hoist insertion and extraction of the Guardian Angels and the injured snowmachiner. The patient was extracted using a rescue strop and hoisted into the aircraft.
The Alaska Air National Guard routinely conducts search and rescue operations across the state in support of civil authorities, providing life-saving assistance in some of the most remote and challenging environments in the world.
Alaska
Alaska House advances bill to boost free legal aid for vulnerable Alaskans
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts6 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO6 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Oregon4 days ago2026 OSAA Oregon Wrestling State Championship Results And Brackets – FloWrestling
-
Technology1 week agoArturia’s FX Collection 6 adds two new effects and a $99 intro version
-
News1 week agoVideo: How Lunar New Year Traditions Take Root Across America
-
Florida2 days agoFlorida man rescued after being stuck in shoulder-deep mud for days