Graham Safty, a University of Chicago Law School student, has published Federal Diversity Jurisdiction and American Indian Tribal Corporations in the University of Chicago Law Review.

Here is an excerpt:

This Comment examines how federal courts determine the state citizenship of tribal corporations when deciding whether they can exercise diversity jurisdiction. It is well established that the Indian tribe itself—the constitutional tribe—is a “stateless entity” that is never subject to federal diversity jurisdiction. A federal court cannot hear a case in which an Indian tribe is a party unless there is another basis for subject matter jurisdiction, such as federal question jurisdiction. The rules that pertain to tribal corporations, however, remain unsettled. Courts have not adopted a comprehensive or uniform approach to determining when, if ever, they can exercise diversity jurisdiction over cases involving tribal corporations. Yet the rule that a court selects can have a profound impact on the likelihood that a tribal corporation will be susceptible to diversity jurisdiction.