Tribal Law: a Niche
Recent news stories have provoked the question of US law and American Indians. The subject is complex and a bit of a niche. The reservations have their own legal systems as sovereign nations, but because they are not fully independent of the United States, US law governs in some cases. This strange interaction raises several points for consideration.
Marie Price for The Journal Record raises the issue that tribes do not receive adequate attention from US courts. One potential reason is the losing streak in front of the Supreme Court. Another reason is the precedent in cases being outdated. The fact that so many of the cases tried on tribal rights and interaction are from the 1800s indicates opportunity for significant challenge.
Many of the American Indian or tribal law cases appear mundane to many people. Particularly interesting, however, are the constitutional and sovereignty issues. For example, the United States provides funding to these sovereign nations, but the impacts are rarely considered. Can and does the United States dictate the use of the money? What about funding for American Indians that is not designated to a tribe? Does the United States have to follow the tribal recommendations on which individuals should receive funding? In this case, think about somebody who is not a member of a tribe; just because the tribe excludes the individual, should the United States follow suit especially when that would be inconsistent with its policies towards other peoples?
Another issues that will dominate in the future pertains to land. Land was the issue under Andrew Jackson and that is a history that cannot be forgotten. As the government has shown that it will waive environmental laws and other regulations to build a border fence, there is potential for reinterpretation and reneging on treaties. As resources become limited as the Director of National Intelligence predicted as a major cause of conflict in the future, tribal land will carry more value. The land has potential for alternative energy like wind energy. What will continue to protect these treaties and the current arrangement? Should these treaties be reconsidered now when the risk is not as high?
On a more individual basis, healthcare and opportunity for tribal peoples is still far behind. Will any individuals have standing to bring lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies, the government, or other corporations? And what is the tribal affairs dynamic to such lawsuits?
As noted in the Journal Record, reform is waiting around the corner. More law schools are providing programs for a focus in tribal affairs including UCLA, Arizona, and Oklahoma. While most individuals are unaware of these opportunities, the niche is becoming more attractive. Unlike certain aspects of law that require practice and repeat, law pertaining to American Indians is relatively young and is bound to branch into interesting discussions both intellectual and very practical.
Marie Price for The Journal Record raises the issue that tribes do not receive adequate attention from US courts. One potential reason is the losing streak in front of the Supreme Court. Another reason is the precedent in cases being outdated. The fact that so many of the cases tried on tribal rights and interaction are from the 1800s indicates opportunity for significant challenge.
Many of the American Indian or tribal law cases appear mundane to many people. Particularly interesting, however, are the constitutional and sovereignty issues. For example, the United States provides funding to these sovereign nations, but the impacts are rarely considered. Can and does the United States dictate the use of the money? What about funding for American Indians that is not designated to a tribe? Does the United States have to follow the tribal recommendations on which individuals should receive funding? In this case, think about somebody who is not a member of a tribe; just because the tribe excludes the individual, should the United States follow suit especially when that would be inconsistent with its policies towards other peoples?
Another issues that will dominate in the future pertains to land. Land was the issue under Andrew Jackson and that is a history that cannot be forgotten. As the government has shown that it will waive environmental laws and other regulations to build a border fence, there is potential for reinterpretation and reneging on treaties. As resources become limited as the Director of National Intelligence predicted as a major cause of conflict in the future, tribal land will carry more value. The land has potential for alternative energy like wind energy. What will continue to protect these treaties and the current arrangement? Should these treaties be reconsidered now when the risk is not as high?
On a more individual basis, healthcare and opportunity for tribal peoples is still far behind. Will any individuals have standing to bring lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies, the government, or other corporations? And what is the tribal affairs dynamic to such lawsuits?
As noted in the Journal Record, reform is waiting around the corner. More law schools are providing programs for a focus in tribal affairs including UCLA, Arizona, and Oklahoma. While most individuals are unaware of these opportunities, the niche is becoming more attractive. Unlike certain aspects of law that require practice and repeat, law pertaining to American Indians is relatively young and is bound to branch into interesting discussions both intellectual and very practical.
Comments
Post a Comment