The Law of American Indians Posts
The Belloni Decision and Its Legacy: United States v. Oregon and Its Far-Reaching Effects After a Half-CenturyMichael Blumm and Cari Baermann
Fifty years ago, Judge Robert Belloni handed down an historic treaty fishing rights case in Sohappy v. Smith, later consolidated into United States v. Oregon, which remains among the longest running federal district court cases in history.
Tentative Draft No. 3 Restatement of the Law, The Law of American Indians will be presented to membership at ALI’s 96th Annual Meeting. The following entry is the Introductory Note to Chapter 3, Subchapter 2 on the Indian Child Welfare Act and Similar State Laws included in the draft.
The following entry contains the Black Letter and Comments of Tentative Draft No. 3, Section 58. Tribal Economic Enterprises.
North Dakota tribal leaders urged members of Congress Tuesday to protect Native American voting rights, highlighting a state voter identification law they said creates unequal access to the ballot box.
The following entry is excerpted from the Reporters Introductory Note on Chapter 5 – Indian Country Criminal Jurisdiction, and Black Letter and Comments of Section 100. Indian Country.
This episode of Reasonably Speaking passes the microphone to American Indian Law experts Matthew Fletcher and Wenona Singel for a serious look at tribal sovereignty, voting rights, violence against native women, and much more.
Appeals court hears Texas case challenging Indian Child Welfare Act; Judge says ‘They are not your children … they are the children of the tribes’Pauly Denetclaw
A total of 325 tribal nations, 57 Native organizations, 21 states, 31 child welfare organizations, 7 members of Congress, and dozens of scholars of federal Indian law and constitutional law supported the law.
Examinations of the Native American experience in the US criminal justice system are still relatively sparse, despite earlier calls for increased attention to Native American crime and justice issues. This is unfortunate, as Native Americans are unique among all groups in US society and face distinctive criminal justice jurisdictional complexities.
A defending argument for the Indian Child Welfare Act was released last week with widespread support from 325 tribes, 57 organizations, 31 child welfare organizations and seven members of Congress.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court heard argument in its latest foray into Indian treaty interpretation, Herrera v. Wyoming. The case concerns the persistence of the Crow Tribe’s hunting right in the 1868 Second Treaty of Fort Laramie. In an occasionally meandering argument, the Supreme Court repeatedly circled the three issues at the core of the case: issue preclusion, the implications of the court’s holding in its 1999 decision in Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians, and the meaning of the treaty term “unoccupied.”