American Indian Law: Cases and Commentary (Table of Contents)

American Indian law review, 1973

In the preface to Law and the American Indian, Professor Price names three disparate audiences for whom the book is meant to be useful: 1) Indian persons and practicing attorneys, as a practical legal research tool; z) law schools, as a coursebook; and 3) colleges and universities, as a legal history of the relationship between Native American peoples and the United States. Although I am a neophite with respect to the legal problems of Native American peoples, have not taught a course dealing with the legal problems of Native American peoples, and am a law professor not a historian, my intent is to comment on the book as a research tool, as a coursebook in law school, and as a history book. Indian persons and practicing attorneys should not look to Law and the American Indian as a quick reference to solve their specific legal problem in Indian law. Law and the American Indian is not a treatise on Indian law that attempts to give answers to all possible problems. The style and arrangement of the book are designed to make the reader aware of and thoughtful about the legal history and legal problems of Native Americans, rather than to provide definite answers to specific legal questions. Cases, statutes, treaties, and other materials are included in the book not because they are authoritative, but because they provoke thought and illustrate the development of the legal relationship between Native American peoples and the United States. Although the book is not a treatise, it is valuable as a research tool by which the Indian person and the practicing attorney can gain entry into Indian law. Professor Price has brought together a wide assortment of materials relating to Indian law. He has arranged these materials into the various topics of Indian law. As a result, an individual Indian or a practicing attorney faced with a legal problem in Indian law need not feel hopelessly lost and afraid to undertake its exploration. Law and the American Indian can be relied upon to provide initial conceptual orientation and signposts for further study through the numerous citations contained in the book. Particularly helpful in this latter regard is the 1z-page bibliography of law review articles relating to Indian affairs.

Fargo Forum, 2022

When Lloyd Omdahl referred to “tribal sovereignty” as “an idea that is over 200 years old,” he was talking about a U.S. legal concept, not the status of Indigenous nations based on their existence in these lands for millennia. The concept of “tribal sovereignty” is a denial of the free existence of Indigenous nations. March 10, 2023, will be the 200th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court decision that started the watered-down idea of “tribal sovereignty” as the basis for a U.S. claim of domination over Indigenous nations. Johnson v. McIntosh, an 1823 property law decision written by Chief Justice John Marshall, said the United States owns Indigenous lands “discovered” by Christian colonizers!

1998

2010

's scholarship and support, just as I have been and will continue to be throughout my career. It nevertheless reflects my distinctive interests and understanding of the law, and I expect that Professor Frickey would have challenged and even disagreed with some of its approach and arguments. Despite this, I dedicate it to him with my deepest thanks and admiration, and hope that it contributes to our shared goal of creating normatively and institutionally grounded frameworks for federal Indian law and policy. On a more personal note, Phil was not only a great scholar, but a truly good man. His generosity to colleagues and aspiring academics was unmatched, and will always be a model to me. I was lucky to know him, and am so sad that we lost him so soon. 1. Although the legal definitions of Indian and tribe vary by context and do not solely or always require biological descent from indigenous peoples, descent remains an important factor. Thus definition as-Indian‖ for criminal jurisdiction purposes requires both some descent from the indigenous peoples in the Americas before European settlement, and recognition of nonracial affiliation with a federally recognized tribe.

The incorporation of American Indian law into the study of Constitutional Law accomplishes a number of pedagogical goals as well as understanding questions concerning American Indian law that naturally evolve in the study. This broadened understanding of the United States Constitution helps to explain the complex subject of opinion writing and the role of politics in reading United States Supreme Court decisions. From a practice perspective, the incorporation of American Indian law into a Constitutional Law study further serves the purpose of explaining legal distinctions, which enable future practitioners to be knowledgeable in "spotting" issues where clients present such facts. In the first introduction of the Constitutional Law class, it takes only a few minutes to raise the subject of Indians in the United States Constitution. This discussion helps to lay the groundwork for the issues that arise throughout the course. Mentioning Indian issues may be problematic because...

American Indian Law Review, 1998

New Diversities, 2017

United States " federal Indian law " consists of a body of rules rooted in the colonial doctrine of " Christian discovery. " Viewed through the lens of Carl Schmitt's concept of " sovereign ban, " Christian discovery creates a " state of exception, " placing Native Peoples both inside and outside the constitutional order of the United States and simultaneously constituting the claim of U.S. sovereignty. The instability inherent in this double performance emerges as the " paradox of sovereignty. " Native self-determination efforts appear as lèse-majesté – " insults to sovereignty " – heretical acts challenging Christian colonial domination. [New Diversities • Volume 19, No. 2, 2017 http://newdiversities.mmg.mpg.de/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/2017_19-02_06_Errico.pdf ]

North Dakota Law Review, 2006

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Dakota Law Review by an authorized editor of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact