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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 17 of 17

Full-Text Articles in Law

A Jurisprudential Quilt Of Tribal Civil Jurisdiction: An Analysis Of Tribal Court Approaches To Determining Civil Adjudicatory Jurisdiction, Jacob Maiman-Stadtmauer Dec 2022

A Jurisprudential Quilt Of Tribal Civil Jurisdiction: An Analysis Of Tribal Court Approaches To Determining Civil Adjudicatory Jurisdiction, Jacob Maiman-Stadtmauer

American Indian Law Journal

There are hundreds of Native American Tribes with their own judicial systems and courts. Under the test first established in Montana v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States has provided a single, nebulous standard for determining the limits of tribal courts’ jurisdiction over non-Indians. Scholars and federal jurists have long assumed that the Supreme Court's framework limiting tribal civil jurisdiction is essential to how tribal courts determine jurisdiction. This paper challenges that assumption. Through a first of its kind survey of tribal court decisions on civil jurisdiction, spanning 26 tribes and covering 71 decisions, this paper …


Legal Issues In Tribal E-Commerce, Adam Crepelle Jan 2022

Legal Issues In Tribal E-Commerce, Adam Crepelle

American University Business Law Review

No abstract provided.


Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin Mar 2021

Preview—United States V. Cooley: What Will Happen To The Thinnest Blue Line?, Jo J. Phippin

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Supreme Court of the United States ("Supreme Court") will hear oral arguments in this matter on Tuesday, March 23, 2021. This case presents the narrow issue of whether a tribal police officer has the authority to investigate and detain a non-Indian on a public right-of-way within a reservation for a suspected violation of state or federal law. The lower courts, holding that tribes have no such authority, granted James Cooley’s motion to suppress evidence. The Supreme Court must decide whether the lower courts erred in so deciding. While the issue before the Supreme Court is itself narrow, it has …


Mcgirt V. Oklahoma, Allison Barnwell Sep 2020

Mcgirt V. Oklahoma, Allison Barnwell

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The United States Supreme Court ruled that large areas of Oklahoma, including much of the City of Tulsa, are reservation land. The case arose from an Oklahoma state court’s conviction of Jimcy McGirt on several criminal offenses. Mr. McGirt argued the State of Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction to prosecute because he was an enrolled member of the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma and committed his crimes on the Creek Reservation. Under the Major Crimes Act, only the federal government has the power to try tribal members for crimes committed on reservation lands. In a five to four decision, the Court held that …


Fmc Corp. V. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Seth T. Bonilla Apr 2020

Fmc Corp. V. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes, Seth T. Bonilla

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In 1998, FMC Corporation agreed to submit to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ permitting processes, including the payment of fees, for clean-up work required as part of consent decree negotiations with the Environmental Protection Agency. Then, in 2002, FMC refused to pay the Tribes under a permitting agreement entered into by both parties, even though the company continued to store hazardous waste on land within the Shoshone-Bannock Fort Hall Reservation in Idaho. FMC challenged the Tribes’ authority to enforce the $1.5 million permitting fees first in tribal court and later challenged the Tribes’ authority to exercise civil regulatory and adjudicatory jurisdiction over …


Upstate Citizens For Equality, Inc. V. United States, Kirsa Shelkey Sep 2018

Upstate Citizens For Equality, Inc. V. United States, Kirsa Shelkey

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Indian Reorganization Act of 1935 is the proper avenue for Tribes pursuing restoration of their historic trust lands. The Oneida Indian Nation of New York long sought to reassert tribal jurisdiction over its historic homeland in Central New York. These efforts were largely unsuccessful until 2008 when the United States took 13,000 acres of this historic homeland into trust on behalf of the Tribe under the Indian Reorganization Act. This case affirms the federal government’s plenary powers over Indian Tribes, and that neither state sovereignty principles, nor the Enclave Clause upset that authority.


Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein Feb 2017

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Standing Rock Sioux’s effort to enjoin the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting of an oil pipeline was stifled by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia. In denying the preliminary injunction, the court held that the Tribe failed to show that the Corps violated the National Historic Preservation Act, and that the Tribe’s belated effort to litigate was futile after failing to participate in the consultation process.


Emulsified Property, Jessica A. Shoemaker Jun 2016

Emulsified Property, Jessica A. Shoemaker

Pepperdine Law Review

The typical American Indian reservation is often described as a “checkerboard” of different real property ownership forms. Individual parcels of reservation land may be held in either a special federal Indian trust status or in fee, by either Indian or non-Indian owners. The general jurisdictional framework provides that federal and sometimes tribal law sets the rights and responsibilities of trust owners, while fee owners are subject to a peculiar mix of state and tribal law. Many scholars have analyzed the challenges created by this checkerboard pattern of property and jurisdiction. This Article, however, reveals an even more complicated issue that …


Wheeler For Two, Do You Have A Reservation? The Supreme Court's Inconsistent Treatment Of Tribal Sovereignty, Fred Kantrow Mar 2016

Wheeler For Two, Do You Have A Reservation? The Supreme Court's Inconsistent Treatment Of Tribal Sovereignty, Fred Kantrow

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.


“Play Or Pay”: Interpreting The Employer Mandate Of The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act As It Relates To Tribal Employers, Rachel Sibila Jan 2015

“Play Or Pay”: Interpreting The Employer Mandate Of The Patient Protection And Affordable Care Act As It Relates To Tribal Employers, Rachel Sibila

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.


Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms Nov 2012

Cooperative Agreements: Government-To-Government Relations To Foster Reservation Business Development, Joel H. Mack, Gwyn Goodson Timms

Pepperdine Law Review

No abstract provided.


Territory, Wilderness, Property, And Reservation: Land And Religion In Native American Supreme Court Cases, Kathleen Sands Jan 2012

Territory, Wilderness, Property, And Reservation: Land And Religion In Native American Supreme Court Cases, Kathleen Sands

American Indian Law Review

In two trilogies of Supreme Court Decisions, both involving Native Americans, land is a key metaphor, figuring variously as property, territory, wilderness, and reservation. The first trilogy, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, comprises Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). The second trilogy concerns Native American claims for religious freedom under the First Amendment and includes Bowen v. Roy (1986), Lyng v. Northwest Cemetery Protective Association (1988), and Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith (1990). The Marshal cases attempted to legitimate the transformation of land from wilderness to territory and property, and …


Civil Regulatory Jurisdiction Over Fee Simple Tribal Lands: Why Congress Is Not Acting Trustworthy, Yvonne Mattson Jan 2004

Civil Regulatory Jurisdiction Over Fee Simple Tribal Lands: Why Congress Is Not Acting Trustworthy, Yvonne Mattson

Seattle University Law Review

Part II of this Comment provides a background on the trust relationship between the U.S. Congress and Indian tribes, while Part III provides an historical analysis of federal policy and attitudes surrounding tribal sovereignty. Part IV discusses State authority over Indian tribes, while Part V briefly discusses the various forms of tribal property and provides a summary of the importance of the power to zone. Part VI discusses jurisprudence on civil regulatory jurisdiction over Indian tribes, specifically, the way in which the two leading cases, United States v. Montana and Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation …


Federal Indian Law: Tribal Sovereign Immunity: Why Oklahoma Businesses Should Revamp Legal Relationships With Indian Tribes After Kiowa Tribe V. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., David B. Jordan Jan 1999

Federal Indian Law: Tribal Sovereign Immunity: Why Oklahoma Businesses Should Revamp Legal Relationships With Indian Tribes After Kiowa Tribe V. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., David B. Jordan

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


Federal Indian Law: Tribal Sovereign Immunity: Why Oklahoma Businesses Should Revamp Legal Relationships With Indian Tribes After Kiowa Tribe V. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., David B. Jordan Jan 1999

Federal Indian Law: Tribal Sovereign Immunity: Why Oklahoma Businesses Should Revamp Legal Relationships With Indian Tribes After Kiowa Tribe V. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., David B. Jordan

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.


Federal Recent Development Jan 1991

Federal Recent Development

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.


The Four Corners Power Complex: Pollution On The Reservation, Laurence A. Mchugh Jul 1972

The Four Corners Power Complex: Pollution On The Reservation, Laurence A. Mchugh

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.