Book contents
- Reading American Indian Law
- Reading American Indian Law
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Editors and Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Core Concepts
- Part II Voices
- Part III Property
- 9 Sovereignty and Property
- 10 The Legacy of Allotment
- 11 A Common Law for Our Age of Colonialism: The Judicial Divestiture of Indian Tribal Authority over Nonmembers
- 12 In Defense of Property
- Part IV (Mis)Understandings
- Book part
- References
11 - A Common Law for Our Age of Colonialism: The Judicial Divestiture of Indian Tribal Authority over Nonmembers
from Part III - Property
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 December 2019
Book contents
- Reading American Indian Law
- Reading American Indian Law
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Editors and Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Introduction
- Part I Core Concepts
- Part II Voices
- Part III Property
- 9 Sovereignty and Property
- 10 The Legacy of Allotment
- 11 A Common Law for Our Age of Colonialism: The Judicial Divestiture of Indian Tribal Authority over Nonmembers
- 12 In Defense of Property
- Part IV (Mis)Understandings
- Book part
- References
Summary
A Common Law for Our Age of Colonialism: documents instances in which modern US Supreme Court decisions depart from historic first principles. The article demonstrates that many of these changes have come in cases involving individuals who are not members of the tribe in question. Frickey documents that the result has been a profound encroachment upon the Indian canons, thus eliminating the foundational interpretational principles that made federal Indian law unique.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Reading American Indian LawFoundational Principles, pp. 262 - 284Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Further Reading
Berger, Bethany, Justice and the Outsider: Jurisdiction over Nonmembers in Tribal Legal Systems, 37 Ariz. St. L.J. 1047 (2005).Google Scholar
Christensen, Grant, Creating Bright-Line Rules for Tribal Court Jurisdiction over Non-Indians: The Case of Trespass to Real Property, 35 Am. Indian L. Rev. 527 (2010).Google Scholar
Dussias, Allison, Geographically-Based and Membership-Based Views of Indian Tribal Sovereignty: The Supreme Court’s Changing Vision, 55 Univ. Pitt. L. Rev. 1 (1993).Google Scholar
EagleWoman, Angelique & Rice, G. William, American Indian Children and U.S. Indian Policy, 16 Tribal Law Journal 1 (2016).Google Scholar
Fletcher, Matthew L. M., The Supreme Court and Federal Indian Policy, 85 Neb. L. Rev. 121 (2006).Google Scholar
Leeds, Stacy L., The Burning of Blackacre – A Step toward Reclaiming Tribal Property Law, 10 Kan. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 491 (2000).Google Scholar
Maxfield, Peter, Oliphant v. Suquamish Tribe: The Whole Is Greater Than the Sum of Its Parts, 19 J. Contemp. L. 391 (1993).Google Scholar
Newton, Nell Jessup, Indian Claims in the Courts of the Conqueror, 41 Amer. U. L. Rev. 753 (1992).Google Scholar
Singer, Joseph, Canons of Conquest: The Supreme Court’s Attack on Tribal Sovereignty, 37 New Eng. L. Rev. 641 (2003).Google Scholar
Skibine, Alexander Tallchief, Duro v. Reina and the Legislation That Overturned It: A Power Play of Constitutional Dimensions, 66 S. Cal. L. Rev. 767 (1992–1993).Google Scholar