United States v. Lara - Federal Powers Couched in Terms of Sovereignty and a Relaxation of Prior Restraints

31 Pages Posted: 15 Oct 2009

See all articles by David P. Weber

David P. Weber

Creighton University - School of Law

Date Written: October 1, 2007

Abstract

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.

Keywords: tribal, sovereignty, jurisdiction, Lara, minimum contacts

JEL Classification: k10

Suggested Citation

Weber, David P., United States v. Lara - Federal Powers Couched in Terms of Sovereignty and a Relaxation of Prior Restraints (October 1, 2007). North Dakota Law Review, Vol. 83, No. 2, p. 735, 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1488404

David P. Weber (Contact Author)

Creighton University - School of Law ( email )

2500 California Plaza
Omaha, NE 68178
United States
402 280 3334 (Phone)

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
39
Abstract Views
637
PlumX Metrics