Here is the unpublished decision in Holl v. Avery.
Briefs here.

Article by James Brooks for Alaska Beacon, August 24, 2026
And for context: Alaska’s Energy Paradox, by Lois Parshley for Alaska Beacon, July 29, 2026

Glenda Douglas of Shungnak, in the Northwest Arctic Borough, shared this photo on social media of a gasoline purchase she made on Friday, Aug. 21, 2026. (Glenda Douglas photo)
Here is the unpublished opinion in State of Alaska v. Newland:
Available briefs:
Lower court materials here.

Here are the new materials in Metlakatla Indian Community v. Dunleavy (D. Alaska):
Prior posts here.

Here is the opinion in Ruby C. v. State of Alaska Dept. of Family and Children’s Services:

Nazune Menka has published “The Corpus Juris of (Alaska Native) Inherent Tribal Sovereignty” in the Alaska Law Review.
Highly recommended!
Here is the abstract:
The inherent Tribal sovereignty of Native nations predates the formation of the United States and is reflected in the constitutional vision of tripartite sovereignty. Yet their sovereignty is oft diminished explicitly by federal law or implicitly by federal courts. This implicit divestiture is often the result of the federal judiciary’s inconsistent interpretations of Indigenous Peoples law. This Article argues that a more principled and coherent approach for federal judges would be to consistently make use of the corpus juris, or whole body of law, including the in pari materia or affiliated statutes canon. The Article posits that the corpus juris of inherent Tribal sovereignty requires understanding whether any federal laws have explicitly abrogated or diminished a specific Native nation’s rights to traditional self-governance and understanding traditional Tribal law. The corpus juris inherent Tribal sovereignty approach illustrates how, where the Supreme Court has utilized the in pari materia canon, the consistency and coherence of Indigenous Peoples law increases. Through an analysis of select cases, involving Native nation traditional land and ways of life, I illustrate how Alaska Native nations have been particularly impacted by the explicit and implicit diminishment of traditional ways of life. However, through traditionally informed governance systems, Alaska Native nations continue to assert their inherent Tribal sovereignty, especially when faced with Alaska’s “sole state sovereignty” arguments in federal courts. The Article utilizes the corpus juris of inherent Tribal sovereignty argument and the constitutional vision of tripartite sovereignty to illustrate how the State of Alaska’s “sole state sovereignty” arguments must fail when utilizing this more coherent approach.

Here is the order list.
Case tag for Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians v. Michigan is here.
Case tag for Alaska v. United States is here.

Here is the complaint in Sovereign Iñupiat for a Living Arctic v. Burgum (D. Alaska):

You must be logged in to post a comment.