The Law of American Indians Posts
On September 4, the Arizona Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Hopi Tribe v. Arizona Snowbowl Resort, et al., the Hopi Tribe’s public nuisance claim against Arizona Snowbowl’s snow making practices.
There’s a widespread notion that “tribal sovereignty” and “Indian treaties” are legal, historical, practical and correct terms. Actually, sovereignty is sovereignty, and treaties are treaties, nation to nation is between and among sovereigns; the use of “tribal” or “Indian” or any modifier is both misleading and belittling.
Last Friday, in an anticipated decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided a controversial case regarding the St. Regis Mohawk’s ability assert sovereign immunity in inter partes review proceedings. The Federal Circuit held that tribal sovereign immunity cannot be asserted in inter partes review proceedings.
All three branches of the federal government had a busy spring. The U.S. Supreme Court just completed its 2017 term in June with a full-strength bench after spending much of the previous term with only eight justices after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016. The vacancy during the 2016 term was prolonged when the Senate refused to consider President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Scalia before the 2016 elections.
A modest courthouse and a fledgling police force, a housing development for American Indian families and a school where students are taught exclusively in the tribe’s ancestral language.
In the mid-2000s, the area surrounding the Fort Berthold Reservation in North Dakota began to undergo a massive transformation after corporations figured out they could access vast wells of oil from the Bakken shale formation using fracking technology.
Since 1959 the Supreme Court has heard an average of 2.6 Indian law cases each term out of a recent average of approximately 80 cases. This paper attempts to identify which factors may be influencing the outcome of Indian law opinions by creating a new dataset of 156 Indian law cases and testing twelve potentially explanatory variables using logistic regression analysis.
An Overview of Practicing American Indian Criminal Law in Federal, State, and Tribal Courts, and an Update About Recent Expansion of Criminal Jurisdiction Over Non-Indians
As a result of changes in federal law, criminal defendants or defense attorneys are now more likely to find themselves appearing in American Indian tribal courts.
This is the second post that presents the Sections from the 2018 American Indian Law Annual Meeting draft that deals with tribal powers over nonmembers. The previous post presented the Black Letter and Comments from § 34, Civil Regulatory and Adjudicatory Authority over Nonmembers.
In the American Indian Law project draft that will be presented at the 2018 Annual Meeting, two Sections deal with tribal powers over nonmembers – § 34, Civil Regulatory and Adjudicatory Authority over Nonmembers and § 35, Tribal-Court Exhaustion Rule. This is the first of two posts that present the Black Letter and Comments from the draft.