Letter | People’s voice

People’s voice

Editor,

The Navajo people deserve to understand the importance of three court orders issued by the Window Rock District Court on Aug. 5, 2026. These decisions addressed my use of presidential line-item veto authority, the Council’s attempt to remove me as president and the vice president from office, and the status of the Navajo Nation controller.

Taken together, the orders reinforce a fundamental principle that – no single branch of the Navajo Nation government possesses unlimited power, and no elected official stands above the Navajo people.

In the line-item veto case, Navajo Nation Speaker Crystalyne Curley asked the court to invalidate my Fiscal Year 2026 line-item vetoes and prevent the Office of Management and Budget and Office of the Controller from implementing them. The court denied that request. The court found that the Executive Branch exercised its line-item veto authority “to put the legislative branch in check.” It further concluded that the veto “served its purpose without the need for court intervention.”

This authority does not belong to the Council or even to the president. It belongs to the Navajo people, who voted to give the president the power to check excessive or irresponsible Council spending. The Navajo people approved the presidential line-item veto precisely because Council delegates had engaged in excessive spending, fraud, and the misuse of discretionary “slush funds” to benefit their families, friends and political allies.

I did not use the line-item veto to shut down the Navajo Nation government. I used it to confront a budget process. The Council fully funded itself while eliminating operational funding for five Navajo Nation courts (and nearly 40 programs in the Executive Branch) and providing substantially less funding to the Office of the president and vice president.

The court also found that the Budget and Finance Committee departed from the customary process under which leaders of all three branches participate in establishing their respective base planning allocations. Instead, the committee used its own “data-driven formula” that was not disclosed to the public. Again, they did not disclose this to the public but instead did this behind closed doors.

Because that formula was not made public, the Navajo people could not independently determine what information was considered, how the calculations were made or whether the resulting allocations fairly reflected the operational needs of each branch.

The consequences were serious. The Council fully funded itself while five courts (and nearly 40 programs in the Executive Branch) and OPVP were denied adequate operational resources. My vetoes challenged that imbalance, and the court declined to block them.

In a separate order, the court permanently restrained the Council from enacting Legislation No. 0263-25 or similar legislation intended to remove Vice President Montoya and myself as the duly elected president through an invalid process.

That legislation would have removed the president and vice president elected by the Navajo people and would have allowed Speaker Curley to become the president while continuing to serve as speaker.

The court found that the proposed removal was based on an invalid statute and would have nullified the votes of the Navajo people. It further concluded that allowing one person to exercise the powers of both speaker and president would have “completely obliterated” the separation of powers.

No group of 16 Council delegates should be permitted to erase the votes of the Navajo people and transfer the presidency to the speaker. The court ensured that did not happen.

The third order addressed the Office of the Controller. The court determined that Sean McCabe remained the confirmed controller and that a Council-confirmed controller serves at the pleasure of the Navajo Nation Council.

I respect the court’s determination. Checks and balances do not mean that one branch wins every dispute. They mean that each branch must exercise only the authority granted to it under Navajo law.

The Council has a defined statutory role concerning a confirmed controller. The president has line-item veto authority granted directly by Navajo voters to check Council spending. Neither the speaker nor the Council may use an invalid process to remove the elected president and vice president and take control of the Executive Branch.

These orders are ultimately about protecting the voice of the Navajo people. Your votes established presidential line-item veto authority. Your votes elected me the president and vice president. Those votes cannot be disregarded whenever they become politically inconvenient to the Council.

With less than 20 weeks remaining in my administration, I want our government to move beyond political attacks and unnecessary litigation. Our people expect us to focus on the work that directly affects their lives, including hardship assistance, roads, senior centers, broadband, and other essential services.

The Navajo people elected us to serve them – not to spend our remaining time fighting over power.

I encourage every Navajo citizen to read the complete Aug. 5 court orders and examine the court’s findings, legal analysis, and conclusions. Our government belongs to the people, and the people deserve to know how their rights, their votes, and their money are being protected.

Dr. Buu Nygren
President
Navajo Nation

 

Get instant access to this story by purchasing one of our many e-edition subscriptions HERE at our Navajo Times Store.

---