Work

Tribal Courts' Failure to Protect Native American Women: A Reevaluation of the Indian Civil Rights Act

Year: 1991
Type: article
Abstract: of the Indian Civil Rights ActCarla Christofferson Congress has always exercised control over Native American 1 peoples through its plenary powers. 2 In 1968, that control took the form of the Indian Civil Rights Act (ICRA).3 The ICRA represents a congressional decision to limit Native American sovereignty by setting forth an Indian Bill of Rights that applies to Native American tribes.4 It is Congress' effort to protect individuals from tribal abuses.By designing a special Indian Bill of Rights,.Congress 1.This Note uses the terms Native American, American Indian, and Indian interchangeably.This usage is not meant to offend any individual's or group's preference, but to reflect the variety of terms used in federal Indian law.2. U.S. CONST.art.I, § 8, cI. 3 ('The Congress shall have Power... [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.");see also Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) (Congress has plenary power to abrogate provisions of Indian treaty).The plenary doctrine has been sharply criticized as embracing racial and cultural prejudice against Native Americans and as implying that they are inferior and require guardianship by Congress.These criticisms notwithstanding, courts are bound by the Supreme Court's rulings that Congress may limit the sovereign rights of Indian tribes.Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. Ross Swimmer, 740 F. Supp.9, 11 (D.D.C. 1990).3. Pub.L. No. 90-284, 82 Stat.77 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § § 1301-41 (1988)).4. Before the ICRA, courts followed Talton v. Mayes, 163 U.S. 376 (1896), which stated that the Bill of Rights does not apply to Indian tribes.5. The Act includes most of the Bill of Rights verbatim.25 U.S.C. § 1302 (1988).
Language: English
Subfield: Law
Open Access status: green
OpenAlex ID: W2539870698
FWCI: 7.717
Cites:
Cited by: 47
Related to: 10