Rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court as They Affect the Powers and Authorities of the Indian Tribal Governments: Hearing Before the Committee on Indian Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Seventh Congress, Second Session on Concerns of Recent Decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and the Future of Indian Tribal Governments in America, February 27, 2002, Washington, DC. |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
A-1 Contractors adjudicate Apache Tribe Arizona Atkinson Trading Bill of Rights Chairman Chief Justice Civil Rights Act committed Congress criminal jurisdiction delegated Federal authority dian doctrine domestic dependent status Duro executive branch exercise Federal courts Federal Government Federal Indian Law fee land Getches hear Hicks holding Indian affairs Indian Civil Rights Indian country Indian law Indian Nation Indian policy Indian Reorganization Act Indian reservations Indian tribal governments Indian tribes inherent issues judges judicial jurisdiction over non-Indians legislation limited Marshall Montana Native American Navajo courts Navajo Nation non-Indians Oliphant preme Court Professor Getches protection Public Law 280 regulate Rehnquist Court reservation lands Senator CAMPBELL sovereign Strate Supreme Court decisions Term termination territorial Thank tion treaty trend tribal authority tribal court tribal jurisdiction tribal land tribal leaders tribal members tribal power tribal self-government tribal sovereignty U.S. Constitution U.S. Supreme Court United upholding Washington Yakima Yazzie
Popular passages
Page 45 - For purposes of this title, the term — ( 1 ) "Indian tribe" means any tribe, band, or other group of Indians subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and recognized as possessing powers of self-government; (2) "powers of self-government...
Page 51 - Conquest renders the tribe subject to the legislative power of the United States and, in substance, terminates the external powers of sovereignty of the tribe, eg, its power to enter into treaties with foreign nations, but does not by itself affect the internal sovereignty of the tribe, ie, its powers of local self-government.
Page 64 - Escondido Mutual Water Co. v. La Jolla Band of Mission Indians, 466 US 765...
Page 39 - Association, served as the Steering Committee for the project, establishing policy and directing the efforts of the staff. Arrow. Inc., a Washington.
Page 51 - ... (3) These powers are subject to qualification by treaties and by express legislation of Congress, but, save as thus expressly qualified, full powers of internal sovereignty are vested in the Indian tribes and in their duly constituted organs of government.
Page 43 - A tribe may also retain inherent power to exercise civil authority over the conduct of non-Indians on fee lands within its reservation when that conduct threatens or has some direct effect on the political Integrity, the economic security, or the health or welfare of the tribe.
Page 65 - National Farmers Union Ins. Cos. v. Crow Tribe of Indians, 471 US 845...
Page 51 - The whole course of judicial decision on the nature of Indian tribal powers is marked by adherence to three fundamental principles: (1) An Indian tribe possesses, in the first instance, all the powers of any sovereign state. (2) Conquest renders the tribe subject to...
Page 48 - But exercise of tribal power beyond what is necessary to protect tribal self-government or to control internal relations is inconsistent with the dependent status of the tribes, and so cannot survive without express congressional delegation.
Page 41 - Essentially, absent governing Acts of Congress, the question has always been whether the state action infringed on the right of reservation Indians to make their own laws and be ruled by them.