Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Indian country (3)
- Indian law (3)
- Native law (3)
- Tribal sovereignty (3)
- Clean water (2)
-
- Environmental law (2)
- Tribal communities (2)
- Administrative law (1)
- Agency capacity (1)
- Agriculture (1)
- American Indian/Alaska Native (1)
- American Rescue Plan Act (1)
- Amicus Brief (1)
- COVID-19 (1)
- Cannabis (1)
- Civil jurisdiction (1)
- Collaboration (1)
- Colonization (1)
- Colorado River (1)
- Criminal jurisdiction (1)
- Critical materials (1)
- Critical minerals (1)
- Environmental health (1)
- Extractive industry (1)
- FAST-41 (1)
- Federal Indian law (1)
- Federal policies in Indian country (1)
- Grand Canyon (1)
- Hardrock mining (1)
- Health inequities (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 31 - 32 of 32
Full-Text Articles in Law
Bystander No More? Improving The Federal Response To Sexual Violence In Indian Country, Sarah Deer
Bystander No More? Improving The Federal Response To Sexual Violence In Indian Country, Sarah Deer
Utah Law Review
For better or worse, the federal government has taken responsibility for providing for the protection of Native people. So long as the federal government refuses to allow tribes to govern themselves completely and independently, it is imperative that the federal government enact policies empowering Native survivors of sexual assault. The federal government must do more to protect tribal members from sexual predators, to safeguard reservations not only from career criminals but also to ensure that federal agencies like the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Indian Health Services do not hire men with a history of violence against women or …
Indians, Race, And Criminal Jurisdiction In Indian Country, Alexander Tallchief Skibine
Indians, Race, And Criminal Jurisdiction In Indian Country, Alexander Tallchief Skibine
Utah Law Faculty Scholarship
With the possible exception of the Indian Major Crimes Act, the classification of “Indian” for the purposes of the ICCA and the Duro Fix is not “racial” even if it includes non-enrolled people of Indian ancestry with significant connections to tribal communities. Furthermore, although the first prong of the Rogers test should be eliminated on policy grounds, the holding of the Zepeda court that the first prong could be satisfied by proof of blood quantum from any Indian tribe, recognized or not, is highly suspicious, seems to be arbitrary, and boosts the argument that the classification of “Indian” in such …