Federal Law and Indian Tribes — Fall 2009 Materials

Syllabus – FLIT – Fall 2009 Revised

Note: The last day of class will be a voluntary review session. No review session for Friday.

Office Hours will be: 10-Noon on Tuesdays

2009-2010 GWW Teacher’s Memorandum Final

Supplemental Tribal Law Materials

Cases

Agua Caliente v. Superior Court

Bittle v. Bahe

Cayuga Indian Nation v. Pataki

Colorado ex rel. Suther v. Cash Advance

Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde v. Strategic Wealth Management

Foxworthy v. Puyallup

Jones v. Pokagon Band Gaming Authority

Miami Nation of Indians v. DOI

MichGO v. Kempthorne (CA DC)

San Manuel Indian Bingo & Casino v. NLRB

TOMAC v. State

Williams v. Babbitt

Other Materials

Fletcher, Bringing Balance to Indian Gaming

Fletcher, In Pursuit of Tribal Economic Development

Fletcher, The Iron Cold of the Marshall Trilogy

Fletcher, The Michigan Tribal-State Tax Agreements

Fletcher, The Original Understanding of the Political Status of Indian Tribes

Fletcher, Preconstitutional Federal Power

Fletcher, Politics, History, and Semantics

Fletcher, Rethinking Customary Law in Tribal Court Jurisprudence

Fletcher, Retiring the “Deadliest Enemies” Model of Tribal-State Relations

Fletcher, Reviving Local Control

Fletcher, The Supreme Court and the Rule of Law

Fletcher, The Supreme Court’s Indian Problem

Fletcher, Toward a Theory of Intertribal and Intratribal Common Law

Johnson Land Claims Map

MacKinnon, Whose Culture?

Pokagon Band Tort Claims Ordinance

Swentzell, Testimony of a Santa Clara Woman

Wilson v. GTB Economic Development Corp. Brief

Recommended but not Required Materials

Cherokee Cases and President Jackson

Fletcher, Advising and Suing Tribal Officials

One Response to Federal Law and Indian Tribes — Fall 2009 Materials

  1. Stephen McLachlin says:

    Any news on when the new version of the Getches Case book will be ready for publication? Just wondering. I continue to watch the blog with interest. Thanks for the continuing references to excellent background materials. If I didn’t have to work, I would love to take your course. As it is, I can still read the cases and have a look at the sylabus. I hope that’s OK, in other words I hope you don’t mind.
    Stephen McLachlin
    DOJ Canada, Ab Law Section, Saskatoon, SK

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