Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Brief Of Tribal Nations And Indian Organizations As Amici Curiae In Support Of The Navajo Nation, U.S. Supreme Court Docket No. 21-1484, Monte Mills, Heather D. Whiteman Runs Him, Dylan R. Hedden-Nicely, John E. Echohawk, Steven C. Moore, David L. Gover, Joe M. Tenorio, Ada Montague Stepleton, Morgan E. Saunders, Wesley James Furlong, Sydney Tarzwell
Brief Of Tribal Nations And Indian Organizations As Amici Curiae In Support Of The Navajo Nation, U.S. Supreme Court Docket No. 21-1484, Monte Mills, Heather D. Whiteman Runs Him, Dylan R. Hedden-Nicely, John E. Echohawk, Steven C. Moore, David L. Gover, Joe M. Tenorio, Ada Montague Stepleton, Morgan E. Saunders, Wesley James Furlong, Sydney Tarzwell
Court Briefs
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT: The Winters Doctrine recognizes and gives effect to the promises made by the United States in treaties, congressionally ratified agreements, and executive orders that Tribal Nations would retain permanent and viable homelands. These promises, made in exchange for the Tribal Nations’ cession of billions of acres of land, paved the way for the non-Indian settlement of the West. Although every tribal homeland is unique, invariably, each requires water to be livable. Applying the canons of construction this Court has developed as part of its federal Indian law jurisprudence, as well as the history and circumstances surrounding the …
Reply Brief For Petitioners, Gonzalez V. Google, 143 S.Ct. 1191 (2023) (No. 21-1333), Eric Schnapper, Robert J. Tolchin, Keith L. Altman
Reply Brief For Petitioners, Gonzalez V. Google, 143 S.Ct. 1191 (2023) (No. 21-1333), Eric Schnapper, Robert J. Tolchin, Keith L. Altman
Court Briefs
QUESTION PRESENTED: Section 203(c)(1) of the Communications Decency Act immunizes an “interactive computer service” (such as YouTube, Google, Facebook and Twitter) for “publish[ ing] ... information provided by another” “information content provider” (such as someone who posts a video on YouTube or a statement on Facebook). This is the most recent of three court of appeals’ decisions regarding whether section 230(c)(1) immunizes an interactive computer service when it makes targeted recommendations of information provided by such another party. Five courts of appeals judges have concluded that section 230(c)(1) creates such immunity. Three court of appeals judges have rejected such immunity. …
Brief For Respondents, Twitter, Inc. V. Taamneh, 143 S.Ct. 1206 (2023) (No. 21.1496), Eric Schnapper, Keith L. Altman, Robert J. Tolchin
Brief For Respondents, Twitter, Inc. V. Taamneh, 143 S.Ct. 1206 (2023) (No. 21.1496), Eric Schnapper, Keith L. Altman, Robert J. Tolchin
Court Briefs
No abstract provided.