This article explores the transformative developments in tribal sovereignty in the United States, with a focus on the Self-Determination Era and the landmark Supreme Court decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma. It examines the historical context, the challenges faced by Native communities, and the progress made toward greater autonomy and justice. Highlighting the resilience of tribal nations and the moral imperative to honor treaties and inherent rights, the article calls for continued advocacy to protect the dignity, cultures, and governance of Native peoples, echoing Chief Joseph's enduring vision of equity and mutual respect.

This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of tribal gaming law, tracing the impact of California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians and the enactment of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). It delves into the regulatory framework established by IGRA, highlighting the distinctions between Class I, II, and III gaming, and examines the complexities of tribal-state compact negotiations. The article emphasizes the balance between tribal sovereignty, federal oversight, and state interests, presenting a nuanced exploration of the challenges and opportunities in tribal gaming. Through case studies and legal analysis, it underscores gaming's role in fostering tribal economic development and self-determination.

Strengthening Sovereignty: Indigenous Consent in Governance and Business This presentation explores how respecting tribal sovereignty and incorporating Indigenous knowledge can foster stronger partnerships, ethical decision-making, and innovative solutions in today's interconnected world.

This article examines the intersection of treaty rights, sovereignty, and Indigenous religious freedoms, focusing on landmark cases like Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association and federal protections under the American Indian Religious Freedom Act. It highlights the constitutional and legal foundations of tribal sovereignty and the role of treaties as the supreme law of the land in safeguarding Indigenous cultural and spiritual practices. The piece underscores the importance of respecting tribal sovereignty in preserving these freedoms while analyzing the challenges posed by federal and state interference. It serves as a compelling narrative on the enduring resilience of Indigenous religious and cultural identities within the framework of U.S. law.

This article explores the interplay between the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and U.S. Federal Indian Law in advancing tribal sovereignty and advocacy. It contrasts the broad recognition of Indigenous rights in UNDRIP with the more constrained framework of Federal Indian Law, examining how tribes can strategically use the principles of UNDRIP to bolster their rights within the U.S. legal system. Highlighting key cases such as Montana v. United States and foundational doctrines like inherent sovereignty, the article offers a forward-thinking approach to harmonizing international standards with domestic law. It serves as a blueprint for integrating global and local frameworks to enhance the visibility and protection of tribal sovereignty and rights.

This article critically examines the Marshall Trilogy's foundational role in shaping Federal Indian Law, balancing its recognition of tribal sovereignty with its paternalistic underpinnings. It highlights the Trilogy’s affirmation of inherent tribal sovereignty, particularly through cases like Worcester v. Georgia, while critiquing its reliance on the Doctrine of Discovery and concepts of "domestic dependent nations." The analysis contrasts the Trilogy’s legal protections against state overreach with modern rulings, such as Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe, that have eroded tribal sovereignty. The piece argues for revisiting and revising foundational principles like those in Johnson v. M’Intosh to strengthen the sovereignty and land rights of tribes, offering insights into how these early decisions continue to influence contemporary Indian law and policy.

This article explores the critical importance of asserting water rights under the Winters v. United States doctrine to safeguard tribal sovereignty and ensure long-term resource sustainability. It examines the legal and strategic measures tribes can employ to protect water resources against external pressures such as climate change and state interference. Highlighting key cases like Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Coachella Valley Water District, it underscores the proactive role of legal action in securing access to essential water resources while balancing political advocacy. The piece provides a forward-looking approach for tribes navigating the complexities of water governance, emphasizing sovereignty, stewardship, and future preparedness.