Citation network
Arizona Vs. San Carlos Apache Tribe
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jul 01, 1983
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Arizona v. SanSearch
-
Carlos Apache Tribe - 463 U.S. 545 (1983) U.S. Supreme Court Arizona v. SanSearch
-
Carlos Apache Tribe, 463 U.S. 545 (1983) Arizona v. SanSearch
-
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus In Colorado River Water Conservation District v. UnitedSearch
-
of the Court. These consolidated cases form a sequel to our decision in Colorado River Water Conservation District v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. DistrictSearch
-
Id. at 424 U. S. 817 , quoting Kerotest Mfg. Co. v. C-O-TwoSearch
-
Moses H. Cone Hospital v. MercurySearch
-
and granted each of them. Northern Cheyenne Tribe of Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation v. TongueSearch
-
On appeal, a divided Court of Appeals reversed. Northern Cheyenne Tribe of Northern Cheyenne Indian Reservation v. AdsitSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Stat. 590. See generally Washington v. YakimaSearch
-
Montana Enabling Act and Constitution, disabled Arizona from adjudicating Indian water claims. San Carlos Apache Tribe v. ArizonaSearch
-
Navajo Nation v. UnitedSearch
-
congressional selection. Colorado was admitted to the Union in 1876. In 1882, this Court held in United States v. McBratneySearch
-
dispositive in our consideration of state jurisdiction over Indian affairs or activities on Indian lands. In Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
Id. at 164 U. S. 244 -245. Similarly, in Organized Village of Kake v. EganSearch
-
with Indian self-government nor impaired any right granted or reserved by federal law. Conversely, Worcester v. GeorgiaSearch
-
more than a passing mention or distinguished between disclaimer States and nondisclaimer States. See, e.g., New Mexico v. MescaleroSearch
-
Ramah Navajo School Board v. BureauSearch
-
Bryan v. ItascaSearch
-
Williams v. LeeSearch
-
Cf. Washington v. YakimaSearch
-
River sought to avoid. We need not rely on the possibly overbroad statement in Page 463 U. S. 565 Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
has a good deal of force. We note, though, that very similar arguments were raised and rejected in United States v. DistrictSearch
-
understood to represent even the slightest retreat from the general proposition we expressed so recently in New Mexico v. MescaleroSearch
-
lands are insulated in some respects by a 'historic immunity from state and local control,' Mescalero Apache Tribe v. JonesSearch
-
their historical sovereignty not 'inconsistent with the overriding interests of the National Government.' Washington v. ConfederatedSearch
-
Together with Arizona et al. v. NavajoSearch
-
Tribe of Indians, et al. ( see this Court's Rule 19.4), and No. 81-2188, Montana et al. v. NorthernSearch
-
Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Winters v. UnitedSearch
-
b). See also Moses H. Cone Hospital v. MercurySearch
-
In Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. UnitedSearch
-
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. UnitedSearch
-
See, e.g., Brief for United States in United States v. DistrictSearch
-
Brief for United States in Colorado River Conservation District v. UnitedSearch
-
to file the brief is granted. JUSTICE MARSHALL, dissenting. In Colorado River Water Conservation District v. UnitedSearch
-
Colorado River Water Conservation District v. PageSearch
-
Arizona v. CaliforniaSearch
-
Id. at 373 U. S. 600 . See Winters v. UnitedSearch
-
Cappaert v. UnitedSearch
-
United States v. MitchellSearch
-
ante at 463 U. S. 225 , quoting Seminole Nation v. UnitedSearch
-
States, 316 U. S. 286 , 316 U. S. 296 (1942). See also McClanahan v. ArizonaSearch
-
is faithfully following general principles of law. After all, just four months ago in Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. MercurySearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial