Apparently the information in this post is making the rounds in Indian Country via email:
I would doubt it's credibility since on the same blog you have:
It appears to me much of the info was taken from the NARF website:
Gov Sarah Palin has only been Gov. for about two years, and these cases were all started prior to that time, I think only one was decided in 2007, which means it started way back in probably 2004 or 2005 as well - prior to her being gov. it would have been her predecessor who would have started all these if either of them can do that. The State Attorney General is the one that was handling these cases and as I recall she had a run in with him as well and he is no longer the Alaska State Attorney - FactCheck.org has stated their email box was been filled recently with these types of emails about Palin most are misleading at best...
The case links at the end of the email is to the court pacer system which is a subscription service for legal professionals; at any rate I doubt you'll see her name on any of these cases and if her husband is Alaskan Native, it doesn't make much sense that she'd have an anti-Alaskan Native position - not to mention some of these positions they state are not consistent with the Republican Platform. And apparently all these cases were decided in favor of the Alaskan Natives; the State vs Norton case appears to be more of a water rights case and who has jurisdiction - apparently NA subsidence rights would attach to the federal water rights - these cases likewise were reactions to the Secretary of Interior ruling on some regulations...
So although there's lots of info on the web - one needs to discern that which is credible and that which is just circulated to smear someone.
Ah, I thought this smelled read more about this - shame on NARF lawyers for doing this!