Citation network
Affiliated Tribes Vs. Wold Engineering
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 16, 1986
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
-
Affiliated Tribes v. WoldSearch
-
Engineering - 476 U.S. 877 (1986) U.S. Supreme Court Affiliated Tribes v. WoldSearch
-
Engineering, 476 U.S. 877 (1986) Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. WoldSearch
-
second time this Court has been called upon to address this jurisdictional controversy. See Three Affiliated Tribes v. WoldSearch
-
in Vermillion v. SpottedSearch
-
U.S. at 467 U. S. 143 -144. Although Vermillion v. SpottedSearch
-
on tribal self-government, and thus could not be sustained. 467 U.S. at 467 U. S. 148 . See also Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Williams v. LeeSearch
-
U. S. 882 embodied in Chapter 27-19 was authorized by Pub.L. 280, and was therefore insulated, under Washington v. YakimaSearch
-
U. S. 82 , 474 U. S. 87 (1985). See also Illinois v. GatesSearch
-
First, respondent's failure to raise any challenge to our consideration of the preemption issue, cf. Oklahoma City v. TuttleSearch
-
U. S. 713 , 463 U. S. 718 (1983) (quoting McClanahan v. ArizonaSearch
-
an important backdrop against which the applicable treaties and federal statutes must be read. See, e.g., New Mexico v. MescaleroSearch
-
Kennerly v. DistrictSearch
-
New Mexico v. MescaleroSearch
-
Apache Tribe, supra, at 462 U. S. 334 (quoting White Mountain Apache Tribe v. BrackerSearch
-
supra, at 448 U. S. 144 ) (footnote omitted). See also Rice v. RehnerSearch
-
action, that state action, without more, may be ruled preempted by federal law. See, e.g., Warren Trading Post Co. v. ArizonaSearch
-
lawful to the extent that it was consistent with Indian tribal sovereignty and self-government, see, e.g., Williams v. LeeSearch
-
scheme embodied in that Act was the product of a wide-ranging and detailed congressional study. See, e.g., Kennerly v. DistrictSearch
-
Court of Montana, 400 U.S. at 423 U. S. 427 . See also Washington v. YakimaSearch
-
McClanahan v. ArizonaSearch
-
that all citizens have access to the courts is obviously a weighty one. See, e.g., California Motor Transport Co. v. TruckingSearch
-
to state adjudication by way of access to other tribunals in such cases. See Tr. of Oral Arg. 26, 27. Cf. Lohnes v. CloudSearch
-
Supp.1985). Although these subjects clearly encompass areas of traditional tribal control, see Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
result simply cannot be reconciled with Congress' jealous regard for Indian self-governance. See, e.g., New Mexico v. MescaleroSearch
-
Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
Apache Tribe, supra, at 462 U. S. 332 (quoting McClanahan v. ArizonaSearch
-
by the Tribe is a necessary corollary to Indian sovereignty and self-governance. See, e.g., Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSearch
-
the Tribe's immunity is not congruent with that which the Federal Government, or the States, enjoy. United States v. UnitedSearch
-
Guaranty Co., 309 U. S. 506 , Page 476 U. S. 891 309 U. S. 513 (1940). Cf. also McClanahan v. ArizonaSearch
-
of tribal sovereignty, like all others, is subject to plenary federal control and definition. See Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSearch
-
a potentially severe impairment of the authority of the tribal government, its courts, and its laws. See, e.g., Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
to represent an abandonment of the federal interest in guarding Indian self-governance. As we explained in Bryan v. ItascaSearch
-
exist, and a conversion of the affected tribes into little more than 'private, voluntary organizations,' United States v. MazurieSearch
-
intrusive when examined against the backdrop of the federal and tribal interests implicated in this case. See Rice v. RehnerSearch
-
preempts any state law that may inhibit the accomplishment of its general purpose. The Court's citation to Kennerly v. DistrictSearch
-
plan like statutes that occupy a given field Page 476 U. S. 895 of regulation. Cf. Silkwood v. Kerr-McGeeSearch
-
Richards v. UnitedSearch
-
U.S. Supreme Court Affiliated Tribes v. WoldSearch
-
Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. WoldSearch
-
See Three Affiliated Tribes v. WoldSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial