Reassessing Concurrent Tribal-State-Federal Criminal Jurisdiction In Kansas,
2011
University of New Mexico - School of Law
Reassessing Concurrent Tribal-State-Federal Criminal Jurisdiction In Kansas, Aliza Organick
Faculty Scholarship
This Article questions the continued viability of the Kansas Act federal legislation, which extended Indian country criminal jurisdiction to the state of Kansas, while leaving unimpaired preexisting tribal and federal jurisdiction over the same offenses. This Article concludes with recommendations for legislative reform and the consideration of intergovernmental agreements with an eye toward providing a solution that respects modern policies of tribal self-determination, protects the financial resources and judicial economy of state and tribal courts, and protects the rights of defendants who may be subject to multiple prosecutions for the same offense.
Navajo Nation San Juan Basin In New Mexico Water Rights Settlement Agreement Of 2010,
2010
University of New Mexico
Navajo Nation San Juan Basin In New Mexico Water Rights Settlement Agreement Of 2010, Navajo Nation, New Mexico, United States
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Settlement Agreement: Navajo Nation San Juan Basin, NM Water Rights Settlement (Dec. 17, 2010) Parties: Navajo Nation, US, NM. This Settlement relates to the Navajo Nation’s water rights in the San Juan River Basin located in NM. It is a part of the Juan River adjudication. It reconciles the Apr. 19, 2005 agreement with the Settlement Act. Allottees may make individual water right claims based upon historic and existing uses found in the Joint Hydrographic Survey Report. This Settlement finalizes all claims the Nation could make to the San Juan River Basin and settles all causes of action against the …
Judicial System Rises To Challenges Of Times,
2010
University of New Mexico - School of Law
Judicial System Rises To Challenges Of Times, Kevin Washburn
Faculty Scholarship
No abstract provided.
Crow Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2010,
2010
University of New Mexico
Crow Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2010, United States 111th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Title IV: Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement - Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement of 2010 in the Claims Resolution Act of 2010 (PL111-291| 124 Stat 3097). The Act ratifies, authorizes, and confirms the water rights 1999 Compact between the Crow Tribe and MT. The DOI Secretary shall promptly execute the Compact and comply with applicable environmental acts and regulations. The Act provides for: 1) the Tribe to a) rehabilitate and improve the Crow Irrigation Project; and b) Reclamation to construct the municipal, rural, and industrial water system; 2) creates a Project Management Committee made up of the Tribe, …
Taos Pueblo Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2010,
2010
University of New Mexico
Taos Pueblo Indian Water Rights Settlement Act Of 2010, United States 111th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Claims Resolution Act of 2010, Title V: Taos Pueblo Indian Water Rights Settlement of 2010 (Sec. 501) Parties: Pueblo of Taos, NM, US, Town of Taos, El Prado Water & Sanitation District, Acequia Madre del Rio Lucero y del Arroyo Seco, Acequia Madre del Prado, Acequia del Monte, Acequia Madre del Rio Chiquito, Upper Ranchitos Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Assn, Upper Arroyo Hondo Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Assn, Llano Quemado Mutual Domestic Water Consumers Assn. Federal Legislation to approve, ratify, and confirm the Taos Pueblo Indian Water Rights Settlement; to authorize and direct the Secretary to execute the …
White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification Act Of 2010,
2010
University of New Mexico
White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification Act Of 2010, United States 111th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Claims Settlement Act of 2010, TITLE III—White Mountain Apache Tribe Water Rights Quantification, PL111-291| 124 Stat 3064, 3073 (Dec. 8, 2010). Parties: White Mountain Apache Tribe, US, AZ. The Act ratifies, authorizes, and confirms the WMAT Water Rights Quantification settlement; authorizes the DOI Secretary to execute the and take all necessary action; to authorize appropriations; and, to permanently resolve certain damages and water rights in the general adjudication of the Gila River System and Little CO River System. The provides for: 1) environmental compliance; 2) tribal water rights; 3) CAP reallocation; 4) tribal leasing, distributing, exchanging or allocation …
Aamodt Litigation Settlement Act Of 2010,
2010
University of New Mexico
Aamodt Litigation Settlement Act Of 2010, United States 111th Congress
Native American Water Rights Settlement Project
Federal Legislation: Title VI: Aamodt Litigation Settlement of the Claims Settlement Act of 2010 (PL 111-291, 124 Stat 3064, 3134). 66cv06639, USDC, DCNM. Federal Legislation to resolve the water rights of Pueblos of Nambé, Pojoaque, San Ildefonso, and Tesuque. Key provisions include: 1) a regional water diversion, treatment and distribution system to serve the Pueblos and the customers of Santa Fe County; 2) a Regional Water Authority, a county utility, and Pueblo water facilities; 3) operation, cost-sharing, and system integration; 4) Reclamation design and construction of the system; 5) conjunctive management of surface and groundwater; 6) well fields, aquifer storage …
Agenda: Opportunities And Obstacles To Reducing The Environmental Footprint Of Natural Gas Development In The Uintah Basin,
2010
University of Colorado Law School
Agenda: Opportunities And Obstacles To Reducing The Environmental Footprint Of Natural Gas Development In The Uintah Basin, Utah State University. Bingham Entrepreneurship And Energy Research Center, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center. Intermountain Oil And Gas Bmp Project, Houston Advanced Research Center. Environmentally Friendly Drilling Systems Program
Opportunities and Obstacles to Reducing the Environmental Footprint of Natural Gas Development in Uintah Basin (October 14)
A public workshop to discuss “Opportunities and Constraints to Reducing the Environmental Footprint of Natural Gas Development” was held in Vernal, Utah on October 14, 2010 at the Vernal campus of Utah State University. The workshop was sponsored by Utah State University, The Bingham Energy Research Center; The University of Colorado Natural Resources Law Center; and the Houston Advanced Research Center, Environmentally Friendly Drilling Program.
The meeting included presentations and panel discussions on:
- Trends and environmental issues related to natural gas development
- Examples of environmental innovations being used in the Uintah Basin
- Examples of innovation & tools from outside the …
Slides: Assessing Opportunities And Barriers To Reducing The Environmental Footprint Of Oil And Gas Development In Utah,
2010
University of Colorado Law School
Slides: Assessing Opportunities And Barriers To Reducing The Environmental Footprint Of Oil And Gas Development In Utah, Douglas Jackson-Smith, Lorien Belton, Brian Gentry, Gene Theodori
Opportunities and Obstacles to Reducing the Environmental Footprint of Natural Gas Development in Uintah Basin (October 14)
Presenter: Dr. Douglas Jackson-Smith, Utah State University--Logan Campus
37 slides
A Reply To Professor Pothier's Review Of Power Without Law: The
Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions And The
Failure Of Judicial Activism,
2010
Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University
A Reply To Professor Pothier's Review Of Power Without Law: The Supreme Court Of Canada, The Marshall Decisions And The Failure Of Judicial Activism, Alex M. Cameron
Dalhousie Law Journal
The Spring 2010 edition of the Dalhousie Law Journal contains an article by Professor Dianne Pothier, discussing my book, Power Without Law: The Supreme Court of Canada, The Marshall Decisions and the Failure of JudicialActivism. In the review, Professor Pothier strongly disagrees with the book's critique of the Supreme Court of Canada's majority decision in R. v. Marshall. In particular, she disagrees with the argument that the alleged treaty right of aboriginals to hunt, fish, gather and trade for necessaries, described in Justice Binnie's majority decision, is constitutionally flawed. Professor Pothier also suggests that the argument is the central thesis …
Reply Brief For Petitioner - Suquamish Indian Tribe V. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010)),
2010
University of Washington School of Law
Reply Brief For Petitioner - Suquamish Indian Tribe V. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010))
Suquamish Indian Tribe v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010))
No abstract provided.
Brief In Opposition To Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari By Respondent Tribes Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, And Tulalip Tribes - Suquamish Indian Tribe V. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010)),
2010
University of Washington School of Law
Brief In Opposition To Petition For A Writ Of Certiorari By Respondent Tribes Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Port Gamble S'Klallam Tribe, And Tulalip Tribes - Suquamish Indian Tribe V. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010))
Suquamish Indian Tribe v. Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Docket No. 10-33 (562 U.S. 981 (2010))
No abstract provided.
In Land We Trust': The Endorois' Communication And The Quest For Indigenous Peoples' Rights In Africa,
2010
Centre for Minority Rights Development
In Land We Trust': The Endorois' Communication And The Quest For Indigenous Peoples' Rights In Africa, Korir Sing' Oei A., Jared Shepherd
Buffalo Human Rights Law Review
This article examines Communication 276/2003, Center for Minority Rights Development (Kenya) and Minority Rights Group International on behalf of the Endorois Welfare Council v. Kenya, argued before the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights. The Endorois Communication is one of the first indigenous rights claims to be examined by an international body after the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
This article begins by placing the Communication within the context of the international indigenous rights movement. The authors then explore the Commission's historical use of Articles 60 and 61 of the African Charter …
Tipsy/Waukell Dave Feud,
2010
Cal Poly Humboldt
Tipsy/Waukell Dave Feud, Susie Van Kirk
Susie Van Kirk Papers
Newspaper references from the Daily Humboldt Times and the Del Norte Record and historical analysis of the feud between Tipsy Frank and Waukel Dave in the late 1800s.
"DHT (1 Jan. 1887) From Alex Dewar, who has just returned from the Klamath country, we learn of the killing of an Indian bearing the sobriquet of 'Tipsy Frank.' During the past four or five years this Indian has killed several of his brethren and has been considered as a very hard character. Recently he stole a horse from another Indian called 'Waukel Dave.' Dave did not relish the idea of losing …
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions,
2010
University of Washington School of Law
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions, Sarah Washburn
Washington Law Review
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and hold land in trust for the purpose of providing land for Indians. In 2009, the Supreme Court held in Carcieri v. Salazar that to qualify for the benefits of Section 5, tribes must show they were under federal jurisdiction at the time the IRA was enacted in 1934. The Carcieri Court then determined that the Narragansett tribe, which obtained federal recognition in 1983 under the 25 C.F.R. Part 83 recognition process, had not proven that it was under federal jurisdiction in 1934. Carcieri …
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions,
2010
University of Washington School of Law
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions, Sarah Washburn
Washington Law Review
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and hold land in trust for the purpose of providing land for Indians. In 2009, the Supreme Court held in Carcieri v. Salazar that to qualify for the benefits of Section 5, tribes must show they were under federal jurisdiction at the time the IRA was enacted in 1934. The Carcieri Court then determined that the Narragansett tribe, which obtained federal recognition in 1983 under the 25 C.F.R. Part 83 recognition process, had not proven that it was under federal jurisdiction in 1934. Carcieri …
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions,
2010
University of Washington School of Law
Distinguishing Carcieri V. Salazar: Why The Supreme Court Got It Wrong And How Congress And The Courts Should Respond To Preserve Tribal And Federal Interests In The Ira's Trust-Land Provisions, Sarah Washburn
Washington Law Review
Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to acquire and hold land in trust for the purpose of providing land for Indians. In 2009, the Supreme Court held in Carcieri v. Salazar that to qualify for the benefits of Section 5, tribes must show they were under federal jurisdiction at the time the IRA was enacted in 1934. The Carcieri Court then determined that the Narragansett tribe, which obtained federal recognition in 1983 under the 25 C.F.R. Part 83 recognition process, had not proven that it was under federal jurisdiction in 1934. Carcieri …
Preservation Ethics In The Case Of Nebraska's Nationally Registered Historic Properties,
2010
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
Preservation Ethics In The Case Of Nebraska's Nationally Registered Historic Properties, Darren Michael Adams
Department of Geography: Dissertations, Theses, and Student Research
This dissertation focuses on the National Register of Historic Places and considers the geographical implications of valuing particular historic sites over others. Certain historical sites will either gain or lose desirability from one era to the next, this dissertation identifies and explains three unique preservation ethical eras, and it maps the sites which were selected during those eras. These eras are the Settlement Era (1966–1975), the Commercial Architecture Era (1976–1991), and the Progressive Planning Era (1992–2010). The findings show that transformations in the program included an early phase when state authorities listed historical resources pertaining to the settlement of the …
In Re Est. Of Sure Chief, No. 2009-P-20 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Jul. 1, 2010).,
2010
University of Montana
In Re Est. Of Sure Chief, No. 2009-P-20 (Blkft. Tr. Ct. App., Jul. 1, 2010)., Blackfeet Appellate Court
Blackfeet Tribe
Court of Appeals held that petitioner could not appeal the appointment of personal representative for her mother’s estate until she had exhausted her remedies at the Lower Court “with verification of how her rights have been violated.”
Baselines Newsletter, No. 6, Summer/Fall 2010,
2010
University of Colorado Law School
Baselines Newsletter, No. 6, Summer/Fall 2010, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center
Baselines: The Natural Resources Law Center Newsletter (2007-2011)
No abstract provided.
