A member of the Northern Arapahos in Wyoming faces trial for shooting and killing a bald eagle as a sacrifice for the tribe's Sun Dance religious ceremony. The 10th Circuit upheld the Bald and Golden Eagle Act, which makes it illegal to shoot eagles, as the "least restrictive means of pursuing the government's compelling interest in preserving the bald eagle."

The ruling reversed a federal judge's decision for Winslow Friday, who argued that his "taking" is exempt from the act because the Sun Dance and its offerings are important religious rituals for Plains Indian tribes. Friday's cousin, Nathaniel, was the sponsor for the 2005 ceremony, which meant his family was responsible for getting the materials for the ceremony - including an eagle. During the dance, the tribe offers up the tail fan of an eagle to the Creator by raising it on a pole.

The government charged Friday with violating federal law by shooting the eagle used in the Sun Dance.

Friday did not have the permit needed to take an eagle for religious purposes, but his lawyers argued that he would not have been granted one had he applied.

The court rejected this claim, saying the government occasionally grants tribal permits. And while the circuit judges understood the district court's frustration with the "biased and protracted nature" of the permit process, they said the law is not futile.

"We cannot deny the government its authority to enforce a congressionally enacted criminal statute based on no more evidence than this," Judge McConnell wrote

David Duncan, author of "The River Why," had sued a husband and wife, and their film companies, and Sierra Club Books, claiming Sierra resold movie rights to his book, without his permission and without paying him, after an initial option expired.

Duncan, author of the critically acclaimed "River Why" and "The Brothers K," sued Thomas Cohen dba Hammermark Productions, and Cohen's wife, Kristi Denton Cohen dba Peloton Productions, in Federal Court.

Duncan says Denton Cohen, who makes corporate training films, claims to have acquired rights to his book from her husband, a Marin County attorney. "This right, however, was not Cohen's to give," Duncan says.

Duncan claims the Cohens and Sierra Club Books perpetrated "a fraudulent scheme," in which Sierra, purporting to act as his agent, sold Hammermark film rights to the book. But Hammermark never exercised the option, Duncan says.

The complaint continues: "SCB, in violation of its fiduciary duty owed to Duncan, revived Hammermark's expired option without any consideration after Hammermark purportedly assigned the rights to Cohen and Cohen offered SCB an opportunity to invest on its own account in the film production. Even in the absence of this fraudulent conduct, Duncan terminated Hammermark's right to prepare a film derivative work in 1993 because Hammermark failed to fulfill its obligations within a reasonable time. ... Duncan has gone to great lengths in an effort to resolve the impasse created by Denton Cohen's insistence that she owns the film rights to the book and SCB's faithless conduct. Denton Cohen is not qualified to produce the film, and Duncan never would have agreed to grant her the rights. All else seemingly has failed, and Duncan now seeks herein by way of a lawsuit to finally put a stop to Denton Cohen's infringement of the right to prepare derivative works of his book 'The River Why.'"