Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Agency
Advocacy Matters, Richard Collins
Advocacy Matters, Richard Collins
American Indian Law Journal
The Supreme Court’s 2022 Castro-Huerta decision was wrong on the points it discussed. It was doubly wrong for a reason it ignored. But the latter error was shared because all briefs and the dissenting opinion ignored it as well. The question presented was whether a nineteenth-century federal Indian country statute provided for exclusive federal jurisdiction over interracial crimes, or for concurrent authority with states. The Court held that the statute allowed concurrent jurisdiction. But it ignored the fact that Congress and the Court, until fairly recently, avoided concurrent federal-state jurisdiction over crimes. Had the self-styled originalist Justices taken their theory …
Stability At Stake: The Effects Of Overturning Chevron On Indian Gaming, Evan Callahan
Stability At Stake: The Effects Of Overturning Chevron On Indian Gaming, Evan Callahan
American Indian Law Journal
The Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright to overturn Chevron Deference marks a significant change in administrative law and could have drastic consequences for the regulation of Indian gaming in the United States. This Note explores the implications of such a shift, emphasizing the importance of maintaining stability in the highly regulated gaming industry. Many stakeholders, including operators, investors, regulatory agencies, and patrons, may face significant uncertainty without doctrines such as Chevron Deference. Without agency expertise in interpreting statutes, the Court may instead directly influence the regulation of Indian gaming in the United States, presenting challenges and uncertainties for all …
Tribal Nations As Lords Of The Fee: A Common Law Argument For Tribal Discretion In Spending Federal Forfeiture Funds, Kent A. Anderson
Tribal Nations As Lords Of The Fee: A Common Law Argument For Tribal Discretion In Spending Federal Forfeiture Funds, Kent A. Anderson
American Indian Law Journal
Federal criminal forfeiture is a powerful tool meeting at the nexus of criminal law and property law. Courts justify its use based on its English common law history. After seizing and selling assets, the federal government doles out payments from its Assets Forfeiture Fund to cooperating law enforcement agencies through equitable sharing agreements that bind recipients to use funds for law enforcement purposes. Tribal Nations have compelling legal and policy arguments for their entitlement to greater access to and discretion over forfeiture funds obtained through seizures in Indian country. These legal arguments are grounded in: (1) federal criminal forfeiture’s failure …
September 2024 – August 2025 Case Law On American Indians, Thomas P. Schlosser
September 2024 – August 2025 Case Law On American Indians, Thomas P. Schlosser
American Indian Law Journal
No abstract provided.
Reading Between The Treaties: Why The Supreme Court Must Honor The Indian Canons Of Construction, Amelia R. Wimmer
Reading Between The Treaties: Why The Supreme Court Must Honor The Indian Canons Of Construction, Amelia R. Wimmer
American Indian Law Journal
This Note critically examines the Indian canons of construction as interpretive tools employed by the United States Supreme Court in cases involving treaties and statutes with Tribal Nations. Ultimately tracing their origins to Worcester v. Georgia, this Note explores how the Indian canons were designed to protect tribal sovereignty, ensure the liberal construction of ambiguous provisions in favor of tribes, and prevent the abrogation of tribal land and rights. Shifts in interpretive philosophy and the rise of textualism have led to a checkered application of the Indian canons across courts. However, a continued application of the Indian canons is necessary …
The Federal Trust Responsibility And Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction: Restoring Justice In Tribal Nations , Sofia Sallas
American Indian Law Journal
Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction (SDVCJ), enacted through the Violence Against Women Act, was designed to address jurisdictional gaps that long allowed non-Indian perpetrators of domestic violence in Indian Country to evade accountability. Yet despite restoring Tribal authority, SDVCJ remains significantly under-implemented. This Note argues that this failure is not merely a policy shortcoming, but a legal one. Congress restored Tribal criminal jurisdiction while conditioning its exercise on federal funding, coordination, and institutional support. Federal agencies, however, have failed to provide the consistent infrastructure necessary for SDVCJ to function in practice. These failures breach the federal trust responsibility, which imposes …