Add to ORKGThe question of removed and unremoved Indian nations competing with each other arises here in New York in the context of the land claims. There is also a land claim which has been filed in Pennsylvania. There are no federally recognized tribes in Pennsylvania and thus, there is an issue of a removed tribe returning to exercise jurisdiction. This raises the next question: what kind of jurisdiction do returning removed tribes have, and, given that removal policy across the country, can these types of cases arise in any number of states
The federal trust responsibility to Indians essentially entails duties of good faith, loyalty, and p...
This paper argues that tribes and scholars need to come to grips with the trade-off between trust an...
Indian land claims have long been a foundational and fundamental subject of American law. Indians an...
The United States government has long managed most Indian tribal money. Frequently, however, the gov...
Federal recognition of an Indian tribe’s sovereignty establishes a government-to-government relation...
This article addresses an ongoing problem in the area of Indian law. For years, the Native American ...
Although federal policy shifted from assimilation to pro-tribal positions, the federal courts have q...
In recent years there has been growing resentment from what one might term, for lack of a better phr...
The United States and every federally recognized tribal nation originally entered into a sovereign-t...
Land has been held in trust by the United States government for Native Americans since Congress enac...
This Article focuses on the actions of the federal agencies that do not appear on the radar screen -...
Recently, plaintiffs have relied upon the federal-Indian trust relationship more often to provide a ...
It is widely reported that the federal government has a trust relationship with the Indian peoples o...
Over the past three decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly confronted the issue of whether I...
The federal government\u27s duty to consult with Indian tribes has been the subject of numerous exec...
The federal trust responsibility to Indians essentially entails duties of good faith, loyalty, and p...
This paper argues that tribes and scholars need to come to grips with the trade-off between trust an...
Indian land claims have long been a foundational and fundamental subject of American law. Indians an...
The United States government has long managed most Indian tribal money. Frequently, however, the gov...
Federal recognition of an Indian tribe’s sovereignty establishes a government-to-government relation...
This article addresses an ongoing problem in the area of Indian law. For years, the Native American ...
Although federal policy shifted from assimilation to pro-tribal positions, the federal courts have q...
In recent years there has been growing resentment from what one might term, for lack of a better phr...
The United States and every federally recognized tribal nation originally entered into a sovereign-t...
Land has been held in trust by the United States government for Native Americans since Congress enac...
This Article focuses on the actions of the federal agencies that do not appear on the radar screen -...
Recently, plaintiffs have relied upon the federal-Indian trust relationship more often to provide a ...
It is widely reported that the federal government has a trust relationship with the Indian peoples o...
Over the past three decades, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly confronted the issue of whether I...
The federal government\u27s duty to consult with Indian tribes has been the subject of numerous exec...
The federal trust responsibility to Indians essentially entails duties of good faith, loyalty, and p...
This paper argues that tribes and scholars need to come to grips with the trade-off between trust an...
Indian land claims have long been a foundational and fundamental subject of American law. Indians an...