Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
-
- Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999)) (5)
- United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998)) (2)
- Washington International Law Journal (2)
- Sohappy v. Hodel, Docket No. 88-3531, 911 F.2d 1312 (9th Cir. 1990) (1)
- Washington Law Review (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999))
No abstract provided.
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999))
No abstract provided.
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Petition For Writ Of Certiorari
Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999))
No abstract provided.
Appendix To Petitions For A Writ Of Certiorari
Appendix To Petitions For A Writ Of Certiorari
Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999))
No abstract provided.
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari
Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari
Washington v. United States, Puget Sound Shellfish Growers v. United States, Alexander v. United States, 26 Tideland and Upland Private Property Owners v. United States, Docket Nos. 98-1028, 98-1026, 98-1039, 98-1052 (526 U.S. 1060 (1999))
No abstract provided.
A Lack Of Trust: South Dakota V. Yankton Sioux Tribe And The Abandonment Of The Trust Doctrine In Reservation Diminishment Cases, A.J. Taylor
Washington Law Review
Over the past three decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly confronted the issue of whether Indian reservation lands sold to non-Indian settlers at the turn-of-the-century under Congress's allotment policy remain tribal territory for jurisdictional purposes. As the means of adjudicating these reservation diminishment cases, the Court has adopted a troubled three-pronged analytical approach. The Court's approach circumvents well-established rules of construction and diverges significantly from historic principles embodied in the trust doctrine that forms the ideological foundation of Indian law. The Court's recent decision in South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe exposes important shortcomings in the Court's multi-factor analysis …
Getting A Seat At The Table: Giving The Indigenous Peoples Of The Russian Far East Control Over Local Government, Stephen R. King
Getting A Seat At The Table: Giving The Indigenous Peoples Of The Russian Far East Control Over Local Government, Stephen R. King
Washington International Law Journal
The traditional homelands of the indigenous peoples of Siberia and the Russian Far East harbor vast wealth in the form of timber, minerals, oil, and gas. Throughout much of the 20th Century, the Soviet Union used forced relocation of native peoples, expropriation of native lands, and other harsh means to gain access to these resources. The native peoples received little or no compensation for the vast natural wealth that the Soviet government took from their lands, and the government often left the land so polluted that it could no longer support the native people's hunting and herding ways-of-life. The Russian …
Brief For The Federal Appellees
Brief For The Federal Appellees
Sohappy v. Hodel, Docket No. 88-3531, 911 F.2d 1312 (9th Cir. 1990)
No abstract provided.
United States' Response To Puget Sound Shellfish Growers' Petition For Rehearing
United States' Response To Puget Sound Shellfish Growers' Petition For Rehearing
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))
No abstract provided.
Petition For Rehearing And Suggestion For Rehearing En Banc Of Intervenors- Defendants/Appellants "Private Owners"
United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))
No abstract provided.
Erosion Of The Indigenous Right To Negotiate In Australia: Proposed Amendments To The Native Title Act, Gretchen Freeman Cappio
Erosion Of The Indigenous Right To Negotiate In Australia: Proposed Amendments To The Native Title Act, Gretchen Freeman Cappio
Washington International Law Journal
The Australian government seeks to amend the Native Title Act, which presently gives indigenous Australians real property rights by virtue of their history living on the land. In their present form, the proposed amendments to the Native Title Act threaten indigenous representation regarding land disputes. The right to negotiate currently protected by the Act must be preserved, ensuring indigenous participation as well as consensual and procedural agreement. The government should not change its course: indigenous parties deserve the same rights today as were granted just five years ago. Government and indigenous leaders must work cooperatively to draft new amendments to …