Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law

PDF

University of Washington School of Law

1991

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Law

Sparrow And Lone Wolf: Honoring Tribal Rights In Canada And The United States, Matthew D. Wells Oct 1991

Sparrow And Lone Wolf: Honoring Tribal Rights In Canada And The United States, Matthew D. Wells

Washington Law Review

Tribal sovereignty and self-government are essential to Native American cultural survival. Current limitations on Congress' plenary power in Indian affairs are inadequate to protect these core tribal rights. This Comment examines recent developments in Canadian law and proposes legislation following the Canadian example to better protect core tribal rights in the United States.


Fragile Gain: Two Centuries Of Canadian And United States Policy Toward Indians, Ralph W. Johnson Jul 1991

Fragile Gain: Two Centuries Of Canadian And United States Policy Toward Indians, Ralph W. Johnson

Washington Law Review

The United States and Canada share a common history in their policies toward and legal treatment of the Native Americans that historically have occupied both countries. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 established a policy of recognizing Aboriginal title and treating with Indians that was binding on the colonies that preceded both countries, and influenced both governments in later dealings with tribes. Assimilationist themes are evident as well in the national policy toward Indians in both countries. Nevertheless, historically and in the present, national policies and laws of the two governments can be contrasted. This Article sets forth a detailed comparison …


Fragile Gains: Two Centuries Of Canadian And United States Policy Toward Indians, Ralph W. Johnson Jul 1991

Fragile Gains: Two Centuries Of Canadian And United States Policy Toward Indians, Ralph W. Johnson

Articles

The United States and Canada share a common history in their policies toward and legal treatment of the Native Americans that historically have occupied both countries. The Royal Proclamation of 1763 established a policy of recognizing Aboriginal title and treating with Indians that was binding on the colonies that preceded both countries, and influenced both governments in later dealings with tribes. Assimilationist themes are evident as well in the national policy toward Indians in both countries. Nevertheless, historically and in the present, national policies and laws of the two governments can be contrasted. This Article sets forth a detailed comparison …


Brief For The Federal Amicus Curiae Jun 1991

Brief For The Federal Amicus Curiae

United States v. Washington, Docket No. 90-35887 (969 F.2d 752 (9th Cir. 1992))

No abstract provided.


Reply Brief Of Appellant Jun 1991

Reply Brief Of Appellant

United States v. Washington, Docket No. 90-35887 (969 F.2d 752 (9th Cir. 1992))

No abstract provided.


Brief For Appellee State Of Washington Jun 1991

Brief For Appellee State Of Washington

United States v. Washington, Docket No. 90-35887 (969 F.2d 752 (9th Cir. 1992))

No abstract provided.


Brief Of The Appellant May 1991

Brief Of The Appellant

United States v. Washington, Docket No. 90-35887 (969 F.2d 752 (9th Cir. 1992))

No abstract provided.


The Decline Of Tribal Sovereignty: The Journey From Dicta To Dogma In Duro V. Reina, 110 S. Ct. 2053 (1990), Peter Fabish Apr 1991

The Decline Of Tribal Sovereignty: The Journey From Dicta To Dogma In Duro V. Reina, 110 S. Ct. 2053 (1990), Peter Fabish

Washington Law Review

In Duro v. Reina, the Supreme Court held that tribal courts do not have jurisdiction over Indians committing crimes within their territorial jurisdiction, but not belonging to their tribe. This holding is incompatible with judicial precedent as well as contemporary executive and congressional policy. The decision also creates serious practical problems for tribal, federal and state authorities by leaving a jurisdictional void over nonmember Indian criminals. A holding that tribal courts have jurisdiction over all tribal Indians who commit crimes on reservations would have been in harmony with judicial, congressional and executive precedent, and would not have created equal protection …


The Imprimatur Of Recognition: American Indian Tribes And The Federal Acknowledgment Process, Rachael Paschal Jan 1991

The Imprimatur Of Recognition: American Indian Tribes And The Federal Acknowledgment Process, Rachael Paschal

Washington Law Review

The Bureau of Indian Affairs administers a program to federally acknowledge unrecognized Indian tribes. The federal acknowledgment process requires that petitioning tribes meet stringent anthropological, historical, and genealogical criteria. These criteria, however, do not accurately reflect prior standards of federal recognition, and the Bureau of Indian Affairs inconsistently interprets them from petition to petition. This Comment describes the background of federal recognition in the executive branch of the government and analyzes the program and its criteria through a comparison of BIA-issued final decisions. This Comment further suggests reform of the federal acknowledgment process through legislative restructuring. In particular, the legislature …