2622 research outputs found
Sort by
PREVIEW; United States v. Cooley: \u3cem\u3eTribal Police Authority Over a Non-Indian on a Public Right-of-Way in Indian Country\u3c/em\u3e
Full text linkCopyright Silencing
Full text linkCopyright has been weaponized to suppress speech,1 frustrate competition,2 punish third parties,3 and silence criticism and erase facts.4 This Essay highlights one form of copyright weaponization I call “copyright silencing.” Copyright silencing is a form of copyright weaponization where owners assert copyrights to silence criticism or suppress facts instead of to protect copyright owners’ legitimate interests5 in their works. This Essay identifies recent or notable instances of copyright silencing, examines the harm copyright silencing perpetrates, and explains why it is increasingly difficult to stop the assertion of copyright to silence, suppress, and censor facts, information, and criticism
The Legacy of Federal Control in Indian Country
No full textOnly five years ago, a grassroots movement led by members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was beginning to organize in opposition to the Dakota Access Pipeline. At the time, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was still weighing whether to approve a permit for the pipeline to cross the Missouri River, just upstream from the Standing Rock Reservation. Nobody had yet heard of #NoDAPL.
Although tribal opposition to the pipeline echoed centuries of Indigenous opposition to projects and priorities imposed upon them by outside interests, no one could have predicted the momentous events that would follow—a national movement for a sustainable future, led by Native voices
PREVIEW; State v. Peoples: \u3cem\u3eUnreasonable Supervision and The Constitutional Limits of a Probation Search\u3c/em\u3e
Full text linkIncorporation By Any Other Name? Comparing Congress\u27 Federalization of Tribal Court Criminal Procedure with The Supreme Court\u27s Regulation of State Courts
Full text linkThis Article examines the different experience of states and tribes with uniform national standards of criminal procedure imposed by the federal government. Part I describes the federal government’s displacement of indigenous justice in service of colonialist political goals, a policy that has contributed to the public safety crisis in Indian country today. Part II explains the constitutional criminal procedure jurisprudence the Court developed for states on which Congress has modeled ICRA’s criminal procedure provisions. In TLOA and VAWA 2013, Congress recognized that restoring tribal autonomy over wrongdoing in Indian country must be part of the federal policy response to the violence indigenous peoples experience in Indian country within the United States. Part III asks whether Congress’ efforts to further federalize tribal court criminal procedure is aligned with its stated commitment to support tribal self-determination and make Indian country safer. This Article asserts that requiring tribes to adopt even more trappings of Anglo-European justice norms as the exclusive means to access increased authority over wrongdoing in their communities is counterproductive to Congress’ stated goals in two ways. First, it constrains tribes’ ability to adapt their court practices and processes to reflect their individual community’s normative values. This can undermine tribal courts’ internal legitimacy and, ultimately, their effectiveness. Second, Congress’ approach puts residents in low-resource and rural tribal communities at even greater risk of harm. Some of the additional procedures TLOA and VAWA 2013 require tribes to adopt as a pre-condition to exercising increased authority are extremely costly to implement. Thus, the promise of increased authority and restored sovereignty Congress has held out can only be accessed by tribes that have adequate revenue sources to pay for them, that are willing to re-direct funds from other public services to fund TLOA and VAWA 2013 upgrades, or that are situated near urban areas where they can access additional human and institutional resources in neighboring communities. This leaves low-resource, rural tribal communities in an Oliphant world, a world in which all crimes within the tribe’s jurisdiction, no matter how serious, are treated as misdemeanors, and where non-Indians can victimize residents of Indian country with relative impunity
Tribal Courts, The Violence Against Women Act, and Supplemental Jurisdiction: Expanding Tribal Court Jurisdiction to Improve Public Safety in Indian Country
Full text linkThe Other Non-Renewable Resource: Cultural Resource Protection in a Changing Energy Future
Full text link
