Citation network
Nevada Vs. Hicks
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 25, 2001
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
-
U.S. 353 (2001) October Term, 2000 Syllabus Nevada Et Al. V. HicksSearch
-
a tribal court's inherent adjudicatory authority is at most as broad as the tribe's regulatory authority. Strate v. A-lSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
question first. A The principle of Indian law central to this aspect of the case is our holding in Strate v. A-lSearch
-
crime. Indian tribes' regulatory authority over nonmembers is governed by the principles set forth in Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
by nonmembers on land held in fee simple by nonmembers, Montana observed that, under our decision in Oliphant v. SuquamishSearch
-
which it relied support the general proposition that the inherent sovereign 2 In National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. CrowSearch
-
defendant. Typically, our cases have involved claims brought against tribal defendants. See, e. g., Williams v. LeeSearch
-
U. S. 217 (1959). In Strate v. A-lSearch
-
without distinguishing between nonmember plaintiffs and nonmember defendants. See also Iowa Mut. Ins. Co. v. LaPlanteSearch
-
Montana the extension of tribal civil authority over nonmembers on non-Indian land. Compare, e. g., Merrion v. JicarillaSearch
-
tribe has taxing authority over tribal lands leased by nonmembers), with Atkinson Trading Co. v. ShirleySearch
-
but see Brendale v. ConfederatedSearch
-
U. S., at 459, quoting Williams v. LeeSearch
-
U. S. 217 , 220 (1959). See also Fisher v. DistrictSearch
-
can have no force' within reservation boundaries. Worcester v. GeorgiaSearch
-
U. S. Dept. of Interior, Federal Indian Law 510, and n.1 (1958), citing Utah & Northern R. Co. v. FisherSearch
-
see also Organized Village of Kake v. EganSearch
-
Washington v. ConfederatedSearch
-
for crimes committed (as was the alleged poaching in this case) off the reservation. See Mescalero Apache Tribe v. JonesSearch
-
cf. Williams v. LeeSearch
-
U. S., at 31.5 Shortly thereafter, we considered, in United States v. KagamaSearch
-
clear that it meant a reservation not excluded from the territory of a State by treaty. See, e. g., Harkness v. HydeSearch
-
in their individual 6 That this risk is not purely hypothetical is demonstrated by Arizona ex rel. Merrill v. TurtleSearch
-
the distinction between individual and official capacity suits is irrelevant. To paraphrase our opinion in Tennessee v. DavisSearch
-
Cf. Anderson v. CreightonSearch
-
C The States' inherent jurisdiction on reservations can of course be stripped by Congress, see Draper v. UnitedSearch
-
as Amicus Curiae 25-26. The sole support for devising this extraordinary remedy is El Paso Natural Gas Co. v. NeztsosieSearch
-
claims in Tribal Court before bringing them in Federal District Court. See National Farmers Union Ins. Coso v. CrowSearch
-
and is therefore unnecessary. 370 v FinallySearch
-
Williams v. LeeSearch
-
Buster v. WrightSearch
-
is at issue here. (If they did pertain to the court's jurisdiction, they would presumably be nonwaivable. Cf. Idaho v. CoeurSearch
-
the common law until relatively recently) that there is no immunity defense whatever without a warrant. See California v. AcevedoSearch
-
s analysis as well as its conclusion, I would reach that point by a different route. Like the Court, I take Montana v. UnitedSearch
-
S. 544 (1981), to be the source of the first principle on tribal-court civil jurisdiction, see Atkinson Trading Co. v. ShirleySearch
-
s own pronouncements on the issue have pointed in seemingly opposite directions. Compare, e. g., Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial