enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. United States v. Kagama - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Kagama

    The importance of the ruling in this particular case was that it tested the constitutionality of the Act and confirmed Congress's authority over Indian affairs. Plenary power over Indian tribes, supposedly granted to the U.S. Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, was deemed not necessary to support the Supreme Court's decision ...

  3. Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_Wolf_v._Hitchcock

    Georgia [59] and the Indian canon of construction in their arguments. [58] Willis Van Devanter [fn 16] argued the case for the United States, taking the position that Congress had the power to abrogate the treaty at will. Devanter cited Kagama as authority for Congress having plenary power over Indian matters. [60]

  4. Plenary power - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenary_power

    Kagama, where the Supreme Court found that Congress had complete authority over all American Indian (Indigenous people/governments) affairs. Many Indigenous people have the opinion that Congressional plenary authority over Indigenous people is an act of tyranny given that they have little or no representation in that body. [citation needed]

  5. Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_sovereignty_in_the...

    In 1934, the Indian Reorganization Act, codified as Title 25, Section 476 of the U.S. Code, allowed Indian nations to select from a catalogue of constitutional documents that enumerated powers for tribes and for tribal councils. Though the Act did not specifically recognize the Courts of Indian Offenses, 1934 is widely considered to be the year ...

  6. Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 21, 2016 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Today's_featured...

    The court opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Freeman Miller (pictured), confirmed the authority of Congress over Indian affairs. Plenary power over Indian tribes, supposedly granted to the U.S. Congress by the Commerce Clause of the Constitution, was not deemed necessary to reach the decision; instead, the Court found the power in the tribe's ...

  7. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Santa_Clara_Pueblo_v._Martinez

    Instead, Congress must exercise its plenary power over tribes to abridge tribal sovereignty. [8] The substantive rights guarantees of the Indian Civil Rights act, such as the guarantee of equal protection under the law, represent such an abridgment.

  8. A Century of Citizenship: Views from Wind River Reservation ...

    www.aol.com/news/century-citizenship-views-wind...

    USA TODAY goes to Wyoming's Wind River Reservation to hear the challenges and the pride of being Indigenous in America.

  9. United States v. Nice - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Nice

    The nearly unlimited power of Congress to adjust Indian rights still exists today. However, in the late 1960s and 1970s, congressional leadership began to see Indian policy in a new light. The past half century has seen a surge of laws favorable to Indians which allow tribes much more influence over their own futures. [ 12 ]