Leadership Studies Commons^™

The U.S. Supreme Court's Explication Of "Federal Plenary Power": An Analysis Of Case Law Affecting Tribal Sovereignty, 1886-1914, David E. Wilkins

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

The concept of tribal sovereignty frequently conflicts with that of congressional plenary power, depending on the definition and basis of plenary power. Analysis of 107 federal court cases between 1886 and 1914 suggests that when plenary power is seen in terms of preemption and exclusivity, it may help to protect tribal sovereignty from private or state incursions. However, if plenary power is defined as absolute and unlimited, tribal rights are not constitutionally protected against federal actions. Although tribes are properly regarded as extra-constitutional entities, they are often treated as inferior in relation to Congress by the courts.

Intra-Tribal Confrontations: What Is To Be Done?, David E. Wilkins

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

Racial, ethnic, and religious wars and conflicts have plagued humanity since the primordial past. But since the thawing of the Cold War, there has literally been an explosion of devastating conflicts that seem far more complex than those which erupted in earlier eras. These are also potentially more threatening to international peace because of their breadth, scope, and probable duration.

These and the multitude of other ethnic, racial, and religious conflicts around the world are far more brutal and ruinous than anything most indigenous people have experienced since the federal government's aberrant and fortunately short-lived policy of Termination and Relocation, …

Guatemalan Political History: National Indian Policy, 1532-1954, David E. Wilkins

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

The relationship between the Spanish and later the Guatemalan state with the Mayan Indians over the past four centuries is a fundamental component of Guatemalan political history. Since the beginnings of the nation, when the Mayans were political and military entities of power and independence with whom the Spanish had to come to terms; to the 1944-1954 "Revolutionary Era," when Indian communities were finally conceded limited social, economic, and political rights; and the period from 1979 to 1984 in which the military regimes killed "tens of thousands by some estimates as high as 80,000" Indians; the Indian population has been …

Transformations In Supreme Court Thought: The Irresistible Force (Federal Indian Law & Policy) Meets The Movable Object (American Indian Tribal Status), David E. Wilkins

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

This article is a content analysis examination of 107 federal court cases involving American Indian tribal sovereignty and federal plenary power rendered between 1870 and 1921. Our focus, however, is the U.S. Supreme Court's Indian Law jurisprudence; thus ninety of the cases analyzed were Supreme Court opinions. The cases seemingly entail two separate braces of opinions. One brace included decisions which affirmed tribal sovereignty. The other brace entailed cases which negatively affected tribal sovereignty. These negative decisions generally relied on doctrines such as plenary power, the political question doctrine, or the so- called “guardian-ward” relationship. We argue that the Supreme …

Breaking Into The Intergovernmental Matrix: The Lumbee Tribe's Efforts To Secure Federal Acknowledgment, David E. Wilkins

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

This article discusses the concept of political recognition (both federal and state) of Indian tribes; explains the difference between administrative and legislative recognition; examines who is or should be empowered to extend federal recognition, the Congress or the executive branch; discusses the major factors that have compelled the Lumbees to seek federal recognition when they were already acknowledged by the state; and examines the major factors that have precluded them from securing complete federal recognition.

Who's In Charge Of U.S. Indian Policy?: Congress And The Supreme Court At Loggerheads Over American Indian Religious Freedom, David E. Wilkins

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

The federal government's three branches—executive, legislative, judicial, and that unwieldy mass known simply as "the bureaucracy" have, during the last half-decade—1987-1991—produced a dizzying crop of laws, policies, proclamations, regulations, and court decisions which have served simultaneously to 1) reaffirm tribal sovereignty; 2) permit and encourage greater state interference within Indian Country; 3) enhance federal legislative authority over tribes; and 4) deny constitutional free-exercise protections both to individual Indians and to tribes.

On the legislative side, Congress has established the experimental Tribal Self-Governance Demonstration Project which is a major step towards restoring the tribal right of self-determination, and is discussing the …

Internal Tribal Fragmentation: An Examination Of A Normative Model Of Democratic Decision-Making, David E. Wilkins

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

A recent commentary by Gerald A. Alfred in the spring 1991 edition of the Northeast Indian Quarterly dealt with a subject matter which is either ignored or radically exaggerated when it is broached in Indian Country: political fragmentation (or segments or cleavages) and ideological conflict within North American Indian tribes and the ramifications of such internal conflict on tribal identity.

This paper, after restating Alfred's major points about Mohawk segmentation at Kahnawake, describes and then analyzes a viable alternative democratic decision-making model which has been specifically designed to address the problems of how not only to restore, but also to …

[Introduction To] Diné Bibeehaz'aanii: A Handbook Of Navajo Government, David E. Wilkins

Bookshelf

The Diné (Navajos) inhabit a vast land of beauty and grace. It is a sprawling territory, bounded by sacred mountains and great rivers. The Navajo Reservation, first delineated in the 1868 treaty, has nearly quadrupled in size since then through some twenty-five additions. Today, the Diné land base is some 25,000 square miles (sixteen million acres roughly), encompassing a large portion of northeastern Arizona, a part of northwester New Mexico, and some 1,900 square miles in southeastern Utah. This tremendous stretch of land, the largest Indian reservation in the county, is slightly larger than the state of West Virginia.

Navajo …