Justice Kagan’s gambling metaphors aside, Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community stands as a resolute affirmation of the Supreme Court’s refusal to qualify tribal sovereign immunity absent congressional action. Bay Mills reaffirms that as domestic dependent nations, tribes exercise inherent sovereign immunity, qualified only by the clear direction of Congress, not the Court. While the dissent vented its frustration with the precedent relied on by the majority, the Court reaffirmed that tribal sovereign immunity extends to all commercial activities occurring off Indian land
This Note will discuss whether Indian tribes can assert tribal sovereign immunity to avoid complianc...
An examination of the tribal courts\u27 civil jurisdiction and sovereign immunity decisions, and a r...
Stemming from a property dispute between a private landowner and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, this...
Justice Kagan’s gambling metaphors aside, Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community stands as a resolut...
This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Bay Mills Indian Community v. Michigan, in ...
While Native nations in the United States have tribal sovereignty—that is, the inherent freedom and ...
Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, a dispute over a controversial off-reservation Indian casino...
Native American Indian tribal sovereign immunity is a judicially created doctrine that provides immu...
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) permits Indian tribes to operate casino games on Indian land...
Indian tribes located within states that permit gambling are allowed to license and operate gaming a...
One manner in which Indian tribes exercise their inherent sovereignty is by asserting sovereign immu...
In 1987, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission India...
The most recent Indian law case before the Supreme Court, California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indi...
The most recent Indian law case before the Supreme Court, California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indi...
Online payday lenders pose serious risks for consumers. Yet, for years, these lending companies have...
This Note will discuss whether Indian tribes can assert tribal sovereign immunity to avoid complianc...
An examination of the tribal courts\u27 civil jurisdiction and sovereign immunity decisions, and a r...
Stemming from a property dispute between a private landowner and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, this...
Justice Kagan’s gambling metaphors aside, Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community stands as a resolut...
This commentary previews an upcoming Supreme Court case, Bay Mills Indian Community v. Michigan, in ...
While Native nations in the United States have tribal sovereignty—that is, the inherent freedom and ...
Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, a dispute over a controversial off-reservation Indian casino...
Native American Indian tribal sovereign immunity is a judicially created doctrine that provides immu...
The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) permits Indian tribes to operate casino games on Indian land...
Indian tribes located within states that permit gambling are allowed to license and operate gaming a...
One manner in which Indian tribes exercise their inherent sovereignty is by asserting sovereign immu...
In 1987, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission India...
The most recent Indian law case before the Supreme Court, California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indi...
The most recent Indian law case before the Supreme Court, California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indi...
Online payday lenders pose serious risks for consumers. Yet, for years, these lending companies have...
This Note will discuss whether Indian tribes can assert tribal sovereign immunity to avoid complianc...
An examination of the tribal courts\u27 civil jurisdiction and sovereign immunity decisions, and a r...
Stemming from a property dispute between a private landowner and the Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, this...