Law Commons^™

Nature's Rights, Christiana Ochoa

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Do forests and rivers possess standing to sue? Do mountain ranges have substantive rights? A recent issue of The Judges’ Journal, a preeminent publication for American judges, alerts the bench, bar, and policymakers to the rapidly emerging “rights of nature,” predicting that state and federal courts will increasingly see claims asserting such rights. Within the United States, Tribal law has begun to legally recognize the rights of rivers, mountains, and other natural features. Several municipalities across the United States have also acted to recognize the rights of nature. United States courts have not yet addressed the issue, though in 2017, …

Where Cultures And Sovereigns Collide: Balancing Federalism, Tribal Self-Determination, And Individual Rights In The Adoption Of Indian Children By Gays And Lesbians, Steve Sanders

Articles by Maurer Faculty

This article analyzes the complex interplay between adoption (traditionally a matter reserved to state family law) and the federal Indian Child Welfare Act in the context of adoptions by gays and lesbians.

As a federal statute that partially preempts state law for the benefit of Native Americans, ICWA implicates three sovereigns: the United States, the state where the adoption petition is brought, and the tribe whose child is the focus of the proceeding. This interplay of sovereigns in itself makes Indian child welfare law complicated and interesting. Beyond these sovereign interests, also to be considered are the interests and rights …

Propensity Or Stereotype?: A Bad Evidence Experiment In Indian Country, Aviva Orenstein

Articles by Maurer Faculty

In a significant break with traditional evidence rules and policies, the Federal Rules of Evidence concerning rape and child abuse, Rules 413 and 414, permit the government to admit the accused’s prior sexual misconduct as evidence of character and propensity. Although these rules have been roundly criticized, insufficient attention has been paid to the fact that in allowing propensity evidence for federal sex offenses (as opposed to offenses under state law), these rules disproportionately affect one distinct civilian population: Indians.

The de facto concentration of Rules 413-414 cases in Indian Country raises troubling questions regarding what it means to have …

Changing Territoriality, Fading Sovereignty, And The Development Of Indigenous Group Rights, Austen L. Parrish

Articles by Maurer Faculty

For much of the 19th and 20th Centuries, the international community resisted the notion of indigenous peoples' rights. In recent years, however, this has changed. The emergence of indigenous rights in international law may finally be upon us. At the very least, the language of international instruments and certain court decisions indicate a new era is emerging in which international law is beginning to recognize the rights of indigenous peoples. And the public seems increasingly aware of the challenges facing indigenous groups. Despite a past where victories for indigenous peoples' rights have been few, scholars are cautiously optimistic for the …

Violence And The American Legal Landscape, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Book Review. Lone Wolf V. Hitchcock By Blue Clark, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Legitimation And Statutory Interpretation: Conquest, Consent, And Community In Federal Indian Law, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Borders Of The Equal Protection Clause: Indians As Peoples, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Sometimes Suspect: A Response To Professor Goldberg-Ambrose, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

United States V. Pend Oreille County P.U.D. No. 1: A Signal Conflict Between Equal Footing And Aboriginal Indian Title, Daniel H. Cole

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A summary judgment decision is ordinarily not casenote material. But the denial of summary judgment in Pend Oreille proved a significant victory to tribal bedlands claimants averting aboriginal rights. The decision allows tribes to avoid the presumption of state ownership of lands beneath navigable rivers, established by the Supreme Court in Montana v. United States, without proving conveyance by the federal government. Most importantly the Pend Oreille summary judgment decision illustrates the substantial flaws of the Montana rule.

The Uses Of Myth: A Response To Professor Bassett, Susan H. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Booknote. Indian Country By Peter Matthiessen, David C. Williams

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Tribal Bedlands Claims Since Montana V. United States, Daniel H. Cole

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

The Taxation Of Indian Property, Robert C. Brown

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.