(Re)Solving the Tribal No-Forum Conundrum: Michigan V. Bay Mills Indian Community

123 Yale Law Journal Online 311 (2013)

MSU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-20

10 Pages Posted: 4 Dec 2013

See all articles by Matthew L. M. Fletcher

Matthew L. M. Fletcher

Michigan State University - College of Law

Date Written: December 2, 2013

Abstract

Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, a dispute over a controversial off-reservation Indian casino, is the latest opportunity for the Supreme Court to address the doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity. The Court could hand Michigan a big win by broadly abrogating tribal immunity, and in turn wreak havoc on modern tribal governance. Alternately, the Court could hand Bay Mills a victory by affirming the tribe’s immunity, effectively precluding judicial review of the tribe’s casino project. In this Essay, Professor Matthew L.M. Fletcher argues that neither choice is preferable to a third option that would both advance tribal self-determination and hold tribes accountable to outsiders. The Court could condition tribal immunity in federal or state court on whether the tribe has solved the no-forum problem by providing a tribal forum for the resolution of important disputes.

Keywords: Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, Supreme Court, tribal sovereign immunity, Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, off-reservation gaming, Native Nation Building

Suggested Citation

Fletcher, Matthew L. M., (Re)Solving the Tribal No-Forum Conundrum: Michigan V. Bay Mills Indian Community (December 2, 2013). 123 Yale Law Journal Online 311 (2013); MSU Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-20. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2362406

Matthew L. M. Fletcher (Contact Author)

Michigan State University - College of Law ( email )

648 N. Shaw
East Lansing, MI 48824-1300
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
201
Abstract Views
784
rank
149,240
PlumX Metrics