The Legal Culture War Against Tribal Law
Matthew L. M. Fletcher
Abstract
Matthew L. M. Fletcher
Abstract
This Article argues that tribal advocates should focus on the practical exercises of tribal sovereignty in a manner that the Supreme Court can understand and respect. This Article theorizes that the vessel of tribal sovereignty should be filled with the tangible reality of tribal law and tribal culture. Tribal law and culture are inextricably intertwined with tribal sovereignty. The Court respects internal tribal sovereignty but does not yet understand the link between tribal sovereignty and tribal law and culture. This Article theorizes that the Court will grant more deference to exercises of tribal authority if tribal advocates establish a link between tribal sovereignty and tribal law and culture.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This Article argues that tribal advocates should focus on the practical exercises of tribal sovereignty in a manner that the Supreme Court can understand and respect. This Article theorizes that the vessel of tribal sovereignty should be filled with the tangible reality of tribal law and tribal culture. Tribal law and culture are inextricably intertwined with tribal sovereignty. The Court respects internal tribal sovereignty but does not yet understand the link between tribal sovereignty and tribal law and culture. This Article theorizes that the Court will grant more deference to exercises of tribal authority if tribal advocates establish a link between tribal sovereignty and tribal law and culture.
Key concepts: Sovereignty, Deference, Law, Political science, Legal culture, Supreme court, Popular sovereignty, Sociology