Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law Commons^™

Federal Recent Developments

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recognizing And Enforcing State And Tribal Judgements: A Roundtable Discussion Of Law, Policy, And Practice, Richard E. Ransom, Christine Zuni, P. S. Deloria, Robert N. Clinton

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Winning Appelate Brief In The First Annual Native American Law Student Association Moot Court Competition, Carol S. Yeatman

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The First Americans And The "Free" Exercise Of Religion, Martin C. Loesch

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Developing A Tribal Common Law Jurisprudence: The Navajo Experience 1969-1992, Daniel L. Lowery

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Defying Precedent: Can Abenaki Aboriginal Title Be Extinguished By The "Weight Of History"?, Gene Bergman

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Regulation Of Counterfeit Indian Arts And Crafts: An Analysis Of The Indian Arts And Crafts Act Of 1990, Jon Keith Parsley

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Potawatomi/Oklahoma Gaming Compact Of 1992: Have Two Sovereigns Achieved A Meeting Of The Minds?, Michael W. Ridgeway

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

So That You Will Hear Us: A Native American Leaders' Forum, Sandra Lee Nowack

American Indian Law Review

No abstract provided.

Property Taxation Of Indian Land After County Of Yakima V. Confederated Tribes And Bands Of The Yakima Nation, Robert W. Mcgee

Seattle University Law Review

In 1987, Yakima County, Washington, initiated foreclosure proceedings on properties belonging to the Yakima Indian Nation and its members. The county's foreclosure was precipitated by the property owners' failure to pay past due ad valorem and excise taxes. Despite vigorous arguments by the Yakima Nation, the United States, and the thirty-one Yakima Indian families likely to be rendered homeless by an adverse decision, the United States Supreme Court held in County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation, that states have the power to impose ad valorem taxes on reservation land owned in fee by …

When The Bough Breaks: Federal And Washington State Indian Child Welfare Law And Its Application, Kim Laree Schnuelle

Seattle University Law Review

Although removal of any child from his or her family is traumatic, too frequently Indian child removal has been performed with little prior investigation and with an absence of cultural sensitivity. The resulting inequalities in Indian child foster placement and adoption rates led to a recognition of the need for Indian child welfare reform, both on a federal and state level. This Article provides an overview of Indian child welfare issues and addresses both the evolution and nature of Indian child welfare reform. Initially, this Article discusses the federal Indian Child Welfare Act, including the cultural history behind the Act, …

Let A Thousand Policy-Flowers Bloom, Nell Jessup Newton

Journal Articles

This article will analyze recent legislative efforts. The first section of the article examines the two proposed national tribal organizations, a National Native American Advisory Council and a Tribal Judicial Conference, and demonstrates that they will not in fact represent all Indian tribes. The second section of the article criticizes the plan to create a national policy center in Washington, D.C., the National Indian Policy Institute. While agreeing that some of the data gathering and dissemination functions proposed for the center are needed, the article notes these functions can be more economically obtained than by creation of a new center. …

Contract Between The United States And The Jicarilla Apache Tribe, Jicarilla Apache Nation, United States

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Settlement Agreement: Contract between the US and the Jicarilla Apache Tribe (Dec. 8, 1992). Parties: Jicarilla Apache Nation and US. The contract will come into effect when certain decrees are entered, claims dismissed, and cases resolved. When a decree is entered in the water rights adjudication styled NM v. US of the NM San Juan River system added to the decree in NM v. Aragon, a second water rights adjudication in NM will fully describe the Nation’s reserved water rights, that is, diversion not to exceed 40K acre-feet per year from the two stream systems. This water will come from …

Dean Black Weasel V. Anna Black Weasel, 92-Ap-19 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App. November 16, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

The Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals denied the Appeal filed by Appellant Dean Black Weasel. Appellant is instructed to file a Motion of Reconsideration.

State V. Perank: Is The Uintah-Ouray Reservation ''Nailed Down Upon The Border"?, David R. Williams

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Ute Indian Rights Settlement Act, United States 102nd Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation, Title V - Ute Indian Rights Settlement of the 1992 Act To authorize addition Act to authorize additional appropriations for the construction of the Buffalo Bill Dam & Reservoir, Shoshone Project, Pick-Sloan MO Basin Program, WY, PL 102-575, 106 Stat. 4601, 4650 (Oct. 30, 1992). Parties: US & Ute Tribe. The 1990 Compact is ratified. The Act and revised Ute Indian Compact of 1990 are intended to quantify the Tribe’s reserved water rights; allow increased beneficial use of the water and put the Tribe in the same economic position it would have enjoyed had the Upalco and Uintah …

An Act To Authorize Additional Appropriations For The Construction Of The Buffalo Bill Dam And Reservoir, Shoshone Project, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, Wyoming, United States Congress

US Government Documents Related to Indigenous Nations

This United States (US) public law (Public Law 102-575), passed on October 30, 1992, also known as the “Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992” contains a number of acts providing additional appropriations for various reclamation projects in the United States. The subsection known as the “Three Affiliated Tribes and Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Equitable Compensation Act” (found on page 4,731) states that the US Congress did not adequately compensate the Mandan, Hidatsa, and Arikara tribes (The Three Affiliated Tribes) or the Standing Rock Nation (Standing Rock Sioux Tribe) for prime lands that were taken for construction of the …

San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1992, San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act, United States 102nd Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation: San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992, Title 37 of An Act to authorize additional appropriations for the construction of the Buffalo Bill Dam and Reservoir, Shoshone Project, Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program, Wyoming (Oct. 30, 1992) PL 102-575, 106 Stat. 4600, 4740. Parties: San Carlos Apache Tribe, US, AZ, Salt River Project Agricultural Improve and Power District, Roosevelt Water Conservation District, Buckeye Irrigation District, Buckeye Water Conservation and Drainage District, Tempe, Chandler, Mesa, Glendale, Scottsdale, Gilbert and Central AZ Water Conservation District. Tribe is a part of the Gila Water Rights Adjudication. This Act ratifies …

1992 Amendments 1984 Ak-Chin Water Act, United States 102th Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation: Ak-Chin Water Use Amendments of 1992 Sec. 10 (PL 102-497, § 10, 106 Stat. 3258, H.R. 5686 (102nd)) amending Ak-Chin Water Use Act of 1984. Gives Ak-Chin the right to lease or devote permanent water supply to any use, including agricultural, municipal, industrial, commercial, mining, recreational or any other beneficial use, in areas initially designated as Pinal, Phoenix and Tucson Active Management Areas pursuant to AZ Groundwater Management Act of 1980, pursuant to a contract that has been accepted and ratified by a resolution of Ak-Chin Indian Community Council and approved and executed by Secretary. Water rights may …

Technical Amendments To Southern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1982, United States 102nd Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

The purpose insofar as it affects the Tohono O'odham Water Rights Settlement is to make various technical amendments in Sec 8.

Jicarilla Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1992, United States 102nd Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal legislation: Jicarilla Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992, PL 102-441, 106 Stat. 2237. Parties: Jicarilla Apache Nation, NM and the US. The US and the Tribal President are authorized to enter into a Settlement Contract. Sections 3 and 4 of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact should provide sufficient water. The Contract provides 33,500 a/f/y diversion from the Navajo Reservoir or Navajo River, and 6,500 a/f/y from the San Juan-Chama Project. Tribe is entitled to return flows and may subcontract for beneficial uses off reservation, but such uses are subject to state, federal and international law. The …

Resource Law Notes Newsletter, No. 26, Fall Issue, Sept. 1992, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

Resource Law Notes: The Newsletter of the Natural Resources Law Center (1984-2002)

No abstract provided.

They Never Kept But One Promise—County Of Yakima V. Confederated Tribes And Bands Of The Yakima Indian Nation, 112 S. Ct. 683 (1992), Deborah Jo Borrero

Washington Law Review

Despite congressional efforts to promote tribal self-determination and self-governance, the Supreme Court continues to give effect to disastrous assimilative policies of the past. A particularly far-reaching case, County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation, upheld state property taxation of tribal land within an Indian reservation. The decision neglects tribal sovereignty and contradicts federal policy. After Yakima Indian Nation, tribalism is in serious jeopardy once again. This Note examines Yakima Indian Nation and concludes that Congress must intervene to protect tribes from state property taxes to preserve tribal land and sovereignty.

Northern Cheyenne Indian Reserved Water Rights Settlement Act Of 1992, United States 102nd Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation: Northern Cheyenne Indian Reserved Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992. PL 102-374, 106 Stat. 1186. Parties: US & Northern Cheyenne Nation. The Act ratifies a Compact with MT on June 11, 1991. The Northern Cheyenne Indian Reserved Water Rights Settlement Trust Fund will be established in the US Treasury, but the Tribe shall make a $11.5 million loan available to MT to assist with the Tongue River Dam Project costs (estimated at $52.2 million). For the Tribe itself, there are authorized $7.4 million in 1995, $9 million in 1996 and $5.1 million in 1997. $3.5 million is authorized …

Duncan Energy V. Three Affiliated Tribes (1992), District Court Of North Dakota

US Government Documents Related to Indigenous Nations

This court case, decided on September 28, 1992, established that the northeast quadrant of the Fort Berthold Reservation was part of the Reservation (therefore within tribal jurisdiction) but found that the Three Affiliated Tribes did not have taxation and employment authority over the gas and oil companies operating in that quadrant. Per Tribal Tax Code, any property on the Reservation used for business or profit is subject to a one-percent taxation and per the Tribal Employment Rights Office Ordinance (TERO), any employers within the Reservation must give preference to Native American workers. The Three Affiliated Tribes attempted to levy a …

Burns V. Burns, 91-Ap-21 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Sep. 27, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• Petitioner is Lorraine Burns and she applied to the Blackfeet Court of Appeals for an issuance of a Writ of Supervisory Control requiring the Tribal Court to enforce all of its prior orders directing that Robert Burns, Respondent, be arrested for failure to pay her any of the sums due to her from the Decree of Dissolution and Stipulation with Regard to Division of Property. 

• Respondent was served, but did not respond.  

• The Appeals Court had already, twice, affirmed that Respondent be arrested for his failure to comply with the Decree of Dissolution and Stipulation. By a motion dated March …

  ---

  Go to article

Whitford V. Skunk Cap, 93-Ca-170 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 8, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court affirmed Due Process rights after the appellant was not allowed to present their case in Court after a hearing was not held and opinion subsequently issued. The plaintiffs were then denied access to their land after the respondent removed the road approach. This denial of access to their land threatened serious irreparable damage to their livestock. The case was remanded to the lower court to have a hearing to comport with the due process rights of the appellant

Rider V. Blackfeet Indian Housing Authority, 91-Ap-02 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 2, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals, the Court reversed a lower court decision which upheld an eviction of a tenant from tribal housing for drug related criminal activity. Pursuant to the Blackfeet Indians Housing Authority’s grievance policy, which assures tenants right to a hearing, procedure by which hearing may be obtained, right to examine documents, be represented by counsel, present evidence and arguments, and have a decision rendered solely upon facts based at the hearing, the tenant was denied those rights to due process. The Housing Authority did not follow its own grievance process. The eviction was stayed pending …

In Re Bear Medicine Children, 92-Ap-14 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., July 1, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• 92)

• In the Blackfeet Tribal Court of Appeals concerning the determination of the best interests of children when deciding custody, the Appellate court remanded the case back to trial court because the children were not afforded the opportunity to have their best interests represented in court so the decision to determine their custody could be made. Child custody cases are not civil matters where failure to appear by one party results in default judgement. Failure of counsel to appear for one parent cannot undermine the rights of the children. If counsel could not appear, the court should have designated an …

  ---

  Go to article

Cobell V. Cobell-Magee, 91-Sc-01 (Blkft. Sup. Ct., June 29, 1992), Blackfeet Appellate Court

Court Decisions

• In an appeal to the Blackfeet Supreme Court, the Court addressed ten issues.

• 1) Whether the trial Court and Court of Appeals erred in providing a modification of custody where the Respondent had not filed a Petition for Modification of custody and where there was no proof that would support a modification? The Court determined that under the Blackfeet Tribal code, all divorces, including child custody and support, must be consummated with Montana State Law and abide by those standards, unless some specific provision of the tribal code requires otherwise. However, since the sole remaining minor, in this case, was …

  ---

  Go to article