Topics In Brief

Federally Recognized Tribes in Louisiana

 

Images
Media: 

Notes for staff uploading video...

  1. Click the Source button above
  2. Paste the Vimeo Code
Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Corporations

 

CORPORATIONS

Entrepreneurs planning to go into business can opt to organize their business structure as a corporation.  (Tribal governments may also form corporations to carry on economic development on or off the reservation, but that is not the subject of this article).  Corporations are creatures of statute, and a state or tribal statute will detail how the corporation may be formed and what its ongoing requirements are.  (Note that most tribal statutes deal with creating tribal rather than private corporations.)

Images
Media: 

Notes for staff uploading video...

  1. Click the Source button above
  2. Paste the Vimeo Code
Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Partnerships

 

 

PARTNERSHIPS

A partnership is a relatively simple business structure to organize and operate.  At its most basic, a partnership is an entity consisting of two or more partners, established to carry on a business.  No papers need to be filled out or filed with the state.  The only state requirement, typically, is that the partnership name be registered if the name used is fictitious. 

Images
Media: 

Notes for staff uploading video...

  1. Click the Source button above
  2. Paste the Vimeo Code
Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Jurisdiction in Indian Country, A Flowchart

Issues of jurisdiction in Indian Country can be complex. UANativeNet.com has developed a flowchart to walk you through the factors determining who has jurisdiction to prosecute and hear cases in Indian Country or involving Indians.

Jurisdiction in Indian Country, A Flowchart (PDF) - this document is designed to be printed double sided on 8 1/2 x 14 (legal) sized paper.

Images
Media: 

Notes for staff uploading video...

  1. Click the Source button above
  2. Paste the Vimeo Code
Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

The International Labour Organisation

 

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Biblography: 

 

  • S. James Anaya, Indigenous Peoples in International Law 55 (2d. ed. 2004).
  • Donna Lee Van Cott, The Friendly Liquidation of the Past: The Politics of Identity in Latin America 262-263 (2000).
Relevant Statutes: 

 

International Instruments:

  • ILO Convention 107
  • ILO Convention 169
  • ILO Constitution
Helpful Websites: 

 

A full list of representations that have been submitted can be found on the ILO website, http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/english/coreplistE.htm

Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Native Hawaiians

 

Native Hawaiians have a unique relationship with the federal government which differs from the relationship between the government and American Indians. Unlike many American Indian tribes and Alaskan Natives, Native Hawaiians are not federally recognized. Native Hawaiian refers to the indigenous Polynesian people of the Hawaiian Islands. Native Hawaiians trace their ancestry back to prehistoric Marquesan, Tahitian, Samoan (potentially Tongan) settlers of Hawaii.

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Biblography: 

 

 

Patrick V. Kirch, Peopling of the Pacific: A Holistic Anthropological Perspective (Annual Review of Anthropology, October 2010), Vol. 39: 131-148.

Relevant Statutes: 

 

 

Native Hawaiian Education Act

Hawaii Homes Commission Act, 42 Statute 108, chapter 42

Relevant Cases: 

 

 

Rice v. Cayetano, 528 U.S. 495 (U.S. 2000).

Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Bald Eagle Protection Act

 

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Relevant Statutes: 

 

 
  • 16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 54 Stat. 250 as amended -- Approved June 8, 1940, and amended by P.L 86-70 (73 Stat. 143) June 25, 1959; P.L. 87-884 (76 Stat. 1346) October 24, 1962; P.L. 92-535 (86 Stat. 1064) October 23, 1972; and P.L. 95-616 (92 Stat. 3114) November 8, 1978.
  • 59 F.R. 22953, April 29, 1994.
  • 50 C.F.R., Ch. I, Subch. B, Pt. 22 (current through November 18, 2010)
Relevant Cases: 

 

  • U.S. v. Dion, 476 U.S. 734 (1986), 90 L.Ed.2d 767, on remand 800 F.2d 771.
  • U.S. v. Fryberg, C.A.9 (Wash.) 1980, 622 F.2d 1010, certiorari denied 101 S.Ct. 545, 449 U.S. 1004, 66 L.Ed.2d 301.
  • U.S. v. White, C.A.8 (Minn.) 1974, 508 F.2d 453.
  • U.S. v. Thirty Eight (38) Golden Eagles or Eagle Parts, D.Nev.1986, 649 F.Supp. 269, affirmed 829 F.2d 41.
  • U.S. v. Allard, D.C.Mont.1975, 397 F.Supp. 429.
  • U.S. v. Friday, C.A.10 (Wyo.) 2008, 525 F.3d 938, certiorari denied 129 S.Ct. 1312, 173 L.Ed.2d 595.
  • U.S. v. Hardman, C.A.10 (N.M.) 2002, 297 F.3d 1116, on remand 622 F.Supp.2d 1129.
  • U.S. v. Wilgus, D.Utah 2009, 606 F.Supp.2d 1308.
  • Gibson v. Babbitt, S.D.Fla.1999, 72 F.Supp.2d 1356, affirmed 223 F.3d 1256.
  • U.S. v. Top Sky, C.A.9 (Idaho) 1976, 547 F.2d 486.
  • U.S. v. Oliver, C.A.8 (Iowa) 2001, 255 F.3d 588.
  • U.S. v. Lundquist, D.Or.1996, 932 F.Supp. 1237.
  • U.S. v. Vasquez-Ramos, 531 F.3d 987 (9th Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 2009 WL 160665 (U.S. Jan. 26, 2009).
Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

The Major Crimes Act

The Major Crimes Act (“MCA”), 18 U.S.C. §1153, was first enacted by Congress in 1885, in direct response to the United States Supreme Court 1883 decision in Ex Parte Crow Dog.  The MCA gives the United States jurisdiction to try and punish serious crimes committed by Indians within Indian Country.

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Biblography: 

 

Other Relevant Topics in Brief

  • The Tribal Law and Order Act
  • Indian Country Crimes Act
Relevant Statutes: 

 

  • Major Crimes Act 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 3242
  • General Crimes Act (also known as the Indian Country Crimes Act) 18 U.S.C. § 1152
  • Indian Country, 18 U.S.C. § 1151
Relevant Cases: 

 

  • Ex Parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 556 (1883)
  • United States v. Kagama, 118 U.S. 375 (1886)
Helpful Websites: 

 

Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Cherokee Freedmen

 

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Biblography: 

 

  • John Velie, Should the United States Be Fighting for Jim Crow’s Survival by its Complicity in Denying Voting Rights to the Cherokee Freedmen? 54-FEB Fed. Law. 43 (2007).
  • A. Alan Ray, A Race or A Nation? Cherokee National Identity and the Status of Freedmen’s Descendents , 12 Mich. J. Race & L. 387 (2007).
Relevant Statutes: 

Relevant Treaties:

 

Relevant Cases: 

 

  • Vann v. Kempthorne (D.D.C. 2007)
  • Raymond Nash v. Cherokee Nation, (D. Cherokee Nation 2007)
Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5

Indian Country Crimes Act

 

Biblio, Statutes, Additional Etceterata
Biblography: 

 

  • Federal Indian Law, 6th Ed., Getches, Wilkinson, Williams, Jr., Fletcher, 2011
Relevant Statutes: 

 

  • Indian Country Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. §1152
  • Indian Country, 18 U.S.C.  §1151
  • Major Crimes Act, 18. US.C. §1153
Relevant Cases: 

 

  • United States v. Rogers, 45 U.S. 567 (1846)
  • United States v. McBratney, 104 U.S. 621 (1881)
  • United States v. Hester, 719 F. 2d 1041 (9th Cir. 1983)
  • United States v. Torres, 733 F.2d 449 (7th Circ. 1984), cert.denied, 469 U.S. 864 (1984)
  • United States v. Prentiss, 256 F. 3d 971 (10th Cir. 2001) (en banc)
     
Images
Media: 

Item's Sorting Weight: 
5
Syndicate content