Cert stage briefs are here.
Lower court materials here.
Ann Tweedy has published “Indian Tribes and Gun Regulation: Should Tribes Exercise Their Sovereign Rights to Enact Gun Bans or Stand-Your Ground Laws?” (SSRN) in the Albany Law Review.
Abstract:
This essay examines tribal laws relating to guns. It then discusses whether tribes whose values accord with either gun bans or stand-your-ground laws would be well-served to enact such laws. It concludes that enforcement difficulties and related problems make both types of laws very costly and that tribes are likely to be best served by enacting more modest firearm regulations and/or protecting the right to bear arms (without expanding the right to self-defense). The essay also concludes that the risks tribes face in the area of firearms regulation in particular contravene Congress’ intent in enacting the Indian Civil Rights Act.
Our own Leah Jurss (MSU Law ’15, MSU Law Review EIC, White Earth Ojibwe) has published “Halting the Slide Down the Sovereignty Slope: Creative Remedies for Tribes Extending Civil Infraction Systems over Non-Indians” in the Rutgers Race and The Law Review.
An excerpt:
The best option for tribes is to work towards building open communications with non-Indians residing on reservations, non-Indians visiting reservations, and state and local governments surrounding reservations. These communications can help to build trust between all parties and a base of empirical evidence showing the effectiveness of tribal civil infraction systems. It is imperative that tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians not be reduced any more than it currently is to ensure the continuing success and viability of tribal nations themselves. A tribal nation that does not have the ability to protect itself from harmful outside influences via its tribal courts has little ability to ensure the safety and security of its citizens, a priority of all sovereign nations.
In the March 2015 edition of the Montana Lawyer (page 18).
Part 1 was here.
in this month’s edition of the Montana Lawyer (see page 14).
Here are the materials in Sprint Communications Co. LP v. Wynne (D. S.D.):
Ann Tweedy has posted “Tribes and Gun Regulation: Should Tribes Exercise Their Sovereign Rights to Enact Gun Bans or Stand-Your-Ground Laws?” on SSRN.
Here is the abstract:
This essay examines tribal laws relating to guns. It then discusses whether tribes whose values accord with either gun bans or stand-your-ground laws would be well-served to enact such a law law. It concludes that enforcement difficulties and related problems make both types of laws very costly and that tribes are likely to be best served by enacting more modest firearm regulations and/or protecting the right to bear arms (without expanding the right to self-defense). The essay also concludes that the risks tribes face in the area of firearms regulation in particular contravene Congress’ intent in enacting the Indian Civil Rights Act.
Here are the materials in Miranda v. Jewell (C.D. Cal.):
20 Miranda Motion for Summary J
An excerpt:
In the absence of a clear directive in the SYB Articles that blood degree of prospective members should be determined based only on the blood degree of an ancestor as listed on the 1940 Census, the Court declines to second guess the Bureau’s reasonable decision to apply SYB law in the same manner in which the Tribe applied it.
Here is “Navajos Face Leadership Crisis as Lawmakers Take Office, Minus a New President.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.