Citation network
Rice Vs. Cayetano
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Feb 23, 2000
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
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
U.S. 495 (2000) October Term, 1999 Syllabus Rice V. CayetanoSearch
-
with the latitude applied to legislation passed pursuant to Congress' power over Indian affairs, see Morton v. MancariSearch
-
that did not mention race but instead used ancestry in an attempt to confine and restrict the voting franchise, Guinn v. UnitedSearch
-
strike down the white primary systems designed to exclude one racial class (at least) from voting, see, e. g., Terry v. AdamsSearch
-
Saint Francis College v. Al-KhazrajiSearch
-
the State, not of a separate quasi sovereign, and they are elections to which the Fifteenth Amendment applies. Morton v. MancariSearch
-
Hawaii Housing Authority v. MidkiffSearch
-
Kaiser Aetna v. UnitedSearch
-
Hawaiian sovereignty which was held in August 1996. After the District Court rejected the latter challenge, see Rice v. CayetanoSearch
-
applied to legislation passed pursuant to Congress' power over Indian affairs. Id., at 1554-1555 (citing Morton v. MancariSearch
-
Guinn v. UnitedSearch
-
see also Neal v. DelawareSearch
-
of these techniques. South Carolina v. KatzenbachSearch
-
United States v. ThomasSearch
-
Louisiana v. UnitedSearch
-
Allwright, supra, at 663-666 (overruling Grovey v. TownsendSearch
-
of 1978, Committee of the Whole Rep. No. 13, at 1018. Rejected as not ratified in a valid manner, see Ka halekai v. DoiSearch
-
Hirabayashi v. UnitedSearch
-
some elements of quasi-sovereign authority, even after cession of their lands to the United States. See Brendale v. ConfederatedSearch
-
Oliphant v. SuquamishSearch
-
to the Indian tribes by enacting legislation dedicated to their circumstances and needs. See Washington v. WashingtonSearch
-
Delaware Tribal Business Comm. v. WeeksSearch
-
Moe v. ConfederatedSearch
-
Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
person, one vote does not pertain to certain special purpose districts such as water or irrigation districts. See Ball v. JamesSearch
-
Salyer Land Co. v. TulareSearch
-
blood). Of course, a Native American tribe has broad authority to define its membership. See Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSearch
-
of Congress over the affairs of Native Americans 2 and the fiduciary character of the special 2 See, e. g., Alaska v. NativeSearch
-
pp. 311-312. Federal regulation in this area is not limited to the strictly practical 3 See, e. g., United States v. SandovalSearch
-
can be tied rationally to the fulfillment of Congress' unique obligation 5 See, e. g., United States v. CelestineSearch
-
U. S. 278 , 286-287 (1909). 6 See United States v. JohnSearch
-
quoting Morton v. MancariSearch
-
trust relationship with the Indians may be delegated to the States. Most significant is our opinion in Washington v. ConfederatedSearch
-
Syllabus Rice V. CayetanoSearch
-
the United States. See Brendale v. ConfederatedSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial