Law Commons^™

Plainly Wrong: The High Court Takes The Low Road, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

The court's most recent salvo in the Long case is no exception. I wrote about this case in April in this paper when the court had just heard oral arguments. My column was titled "A Matter of Disrespect" because in reading the transcript of the oral arguments, it was plainly evident in the questions raised by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Antonin Scalia that they had very little respect for the legitimacy of tribal courts or their decisions.

The question that must be asked: Why are tribal courts treated differently than non-Indian courts? Not willing to confront this head-on, …

Indigenous Peoples, American Federalism, And The Supreme Court, David E. Wilkins

Jepson School of Leadership Studies articles, book chapters and other publications

As America breathes a sigh of relief in the afterglow of the pyrotechnics associated with the first post-September 11 July 4, pondering its global status as as the leading agent in its self-­proclaimed "War on Terrorism," and its domestic situation with a "War on Federalism" raging between the Supreme Court's redefined notion of states' rights and federal authority, it seems a propitious time to ask where indigenous nations fit in this warlike atmosphere, given that the history of Indian/U.S. relations involved a fair amount of war-related activities.

[Introduction To] American Indian Sovereignty And The U.S. Supreme Court: The Masking Of Justice, David E. Wilkins

Bookshelf

"Like the miner's canary, the Indian marks the shift from fresh air to poison gas in our political atmosphere and our treatment of Indians, even more than our treatment of other minorities, reflects the rise and fall in our democratic faith, wrote Felix S. Cohen, an early expert in Indian legal affairs.

In this book, David Wilkins charts the "fall in our democratic faith" through fifteen landmark cases in which the Supreme Court significantly curtailed Indian rights. He offers compelling evidence that Supreme Court justices selectively used precedents and facts, both historical and contemporary, to arrive at decisions that have …