WSJ on New York’s Suit against Indian Country Payday Lenders

Here. Excerpt:

Courts have long upheld that tribal-owned businesses enjoy the same sovereign immunity as tribal governments and aren’t subject to state law. Matthew Fletcher, director of Michigan State University’s Indigenous Law and Policy Center, said the ownership structure of a firm has bearing on its legal defenses in such situations. Lenders owned by an individual member of a tribe but not deemed to be owned by the tribe itself would have less ground in attempting to block lawsuits or other state action, he said.

“I would assume the tribe and the tribal entity would respond by saying you don’t have jurisdiction over the tribal nation,” Mr. Fletcher said.

 

This entry was posted in Author: Matthew L.M. Fletcher, News, Tribal Codes, tribal courts and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to WSJ on New York’s Suit against Indian Country Payday Lenders

  1. Pingback: New York ex rel. Schneiderman v. Western Sky Materials | Turtle Talk

  2. Eventually, the more sophisticated will recognize that the Western Sky model was built in the “early days” and would not be duplicated today. AFS tribal economic business enterprises have evolved significantly. “The nail that sticks up above the rest will get hammered down first.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s