United States v. Lara - Federal Powers Couched in Terms of Sovereignty and a Relaxation of Prior Restraints
David P. Weber
Creighton University - School of Law
October 1, 2007
North Dakota Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 2, p. 735, 2007
This article examines the problematic reasoning of the Court in determining the scope of Indian tribes' sovereignty as a jurisdictional matter. By overlooking history, the Court characterizes a delegation of power as a relaxation of a prior restraint, implying no new delegation of power, and therefore concurrent criminal proceedings commenced by a sovereign tribe and by the federal government present no issue of double jeopardy. The article advocates, among other possibilities, the expansion of the scope of tribal jurisdiction to such a point that it could be deemed a near equivalent to federal criminal jurisdiction where such jurisdiction would be based primarily on the traditional rules of minimum contacts present in U.S. jurisprudence.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 31
Keywords: tribal, sovereignty, jurisdiction, Lara, minimum contacts
JEL Classification: k10Accepted Paper Series
Date posted: October 15, 2009
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.813 seconds