Here is today’s order list.
Cert stage materials here, here, and here.

Here is today’s order list.
Cert stage materials in Flying T Ranch Inc. v. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians here.

Here are the materials in Lopez v. United States:

Meghanlata Gupta has posted “‘In Keeping with the Constitution’s Original Design’: History and Tradition in Federal Indian Law”, forthcoming in the Public Land and Resources Law Review, on SSRN.
Highly recommended!!
Here is the abstract:
This Article examines the Supreme Court’s use of history and tradition in federal Indian law. In recent years, the Court has increasingly relied on Founding-era practices and historical traditions to determine constitutional meaning in areas such as firearm regulation, substantive due process, and religious liberty. At the same time, while the Founding-era record contains substantial evidence that Native nations were understood and treated as independent, sovereign political communities, this evidence has not yet been fully incorporated into the Supreme Court’s Indian law jurisprudence. Examining decisions from Oliphant to Castro-Huerta, this Article describes the Court’s approaches to historical analysis in Indian law cases and identifies areas where deeper engagement with the historical record could inform the doctrine. By centering Indian law within the broader history-and-tradition framework, this Article argues that more consistent applications of history support the robust conception of tribal sovereignty contemplated at the Founding.

Here:
Question presented:
Whether respondents—Indians charged with felony assault in Indian country under the Major Crimes Act in violation of 18 U.S.C. 113(a)(6) and (8) and 1153(a)— were entitled both to a jury instruction on a lesser included offense not listed in the Major Crimes Act and complete acquittal if the jury found them guilty of that lesser offense.
Lower court materials here.
Here is the petition in Flying T Ranch Inc. v. Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians:
Question presented:
Under the immovable-property rule, may a party sue an Indian tribe, without the latter’s consent, in a State court to quiet title to real property located in that State but which is not within the boundaries of the tribe’s reservation and is not held in trust by the United States?
Lower court materials here.

Here:
Questions presented:
1. Whether the Indian Commerce Clause preempts state regulation of loans made on an Indian reservation, by an arm of a tribe, when the borrower contracts via the internet.
2. Whether a violation of the unlawful debt prohibition of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1962, requires scienter for civil liability.
Lower court materials here.

You must be logged in to post a comment.