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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 16 of 16

Full-Text Articles in Law

Appellants' Reply Brief Oct 1995

Appellants' Reply Brief

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief Of Appellee-Plantiff Tribes Oct 1995

Brief Of Appellee-Plantiff Tribes

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Reply Brief Of Appellants Washington Harvest Divers Association Sep 1995

Reply Brief Of Appellants Washington Harvest Divers Association

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


State's Response Brief Sep 1995

State's Response Brief

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief Of Plaintiff/Appellee Tribes Sep 1995

Brief Of Plaintiff/Appellee Tribes

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Appellant's Brief Aug 1995

Appellant's Brief

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Opening Brief Of Appellants Aug 1995

Opening Brief Of Appellants

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 95-35442, 95-35446 (86 F.3d 1499 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Reply Brief For Appellants Aug 1995

Reply Brief For Appellants

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief Of The Appellee Lummi Indian Nation Jul 1995

Brief Of The Appellee Lummi Indian Nation

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief For Appellee United States Of America Jul 1995

Brief For Appellee United States Of America

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief For Appellee Indian Tribes Jul 1995

Brief For Appellee Indian Tribes

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Appellee Lummi Indian Nation Brief Jul 1995

Appellee Lummi Indian Nation Brief

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief For Appellee State Of Washington Jul 1995

Brief For Appellee State Of Washington

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Brief For Appellants Jun 1995

Brief For Appellants

United States v. Washington, Docket No.95-35202 (98 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 1996))

No abstract provided.


Chief Justice Rehnquist And The Indian Cases, Ralph W. Johnson, Berrie Martinis Jan 1995

Chief Justice Rehnquist And The Indian Cases, Ralph W. Johnson, Berrie Martinis

Articles

Since his appointment to the United States Supreme Court, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has guided significant changes m Indian law He has articulated new tests for determining the status of tribes and their powers as sovereign nations. He has voted to disestablish tribes and limit their sovereign powers. He has voted to allow states to exercise jurisdiction over Indian and non-Indian activities and property on reservations.

The articulation of a legal philosophy is generally accepted, expected, and probably necessary for a Supreme Court Justice. At the same time it is instructive to know the views of the members of …


Chief Justice Rehnquist And The Indian Cases, Ralph W. Johnson, Berrie Martinis Jan 1995

Chief Justice Rehnquist And The Indian Cases, Ralph W. Johnson, Berrie Martinis

Articles

Since his appointment to the United States Supreme Court, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has guided significant changes in Indian law. He has articulated new tests for determining the status of tribes and their powers as sovereign nations. He has voted to disestablish tribes and limit their sovereign powers. He has voted to allow states to exercise jurisdiction over Indian and non-Indian activities and property on reservations.

The articulation of a legal philosophy is generally accepted, expected, and probably necessary for a Supreme Court Justice. At the same time it is instructive to know the views of the members of …