THE MARSHALL TRILOGY / DOMESTIC DEPENDENT NATION STATUS

True or False

1. The Marshall Trilogy ruled that U.S. states don't have jurisdiction over Native nations. Public Law 280 created exceptions to that rule.

1. The Marshall Trilogy "demoted" tribal governments from being "foreign" to being "domestic."

1. The Marshall Trilogy strengthened tribal sovereignty by ruling that tribes were just as sovereign as any other country.

1. One of the main things that the Marshall Trilogy considered was the sovereign status of Native nations in relation to the U.S.

1. Marshall coined the term "Domestic Dependent Nations." This concept means that the United States recognizes Native nations as having some sovereignty. However, tribal sovereignty is considered inferior to the sovereignty of foreign countries like France.

1. While many people think that the concept of a "Domestic Dependent Nation" was established in the Marshall Trilogy, it was actually established under Public Law 280.

1. The Marshall Trilogy clarified that tribes were more sovereign than a state, but less sovereign than the federal government.

1. The Marshall Trilogy ruled that state governments have jurisdiction over Native nations.

THE TRUST RESPONSIBILITY

(true or False )

1. Under the Trust Responsibility the federal government has a "fiduciary responsibility" to act in the best interest of Native nations

1. To date, the U.S. has fulfilled its fiduciary responsibility.

3)The Trust Responsibility describes the U.S.'s responsibility to fulfill its promises to Native nations.

4) Services that Native people receive under the Trust Responsibility are similar to welfare benefits or charitable gifts.

5) The "bad side" of the Trust Responsibility stems from the idea that Native people are incapable of managing their own resources.

THE PLENARY POWER DOCTRINE

(true or False )

1. The term "Plenary Power" was coined by Chief Justice John Marshall in the Marshall Trilogy.
2. The Plenary Power Doctrine grants Congress control over Native nations, including the ability to break treaties.
3. The Plenary Power Doctrine gave Congress the right to break treaties with foreign countries like Canada or Mexico.
4. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Congress has "Plenary Power" over Native nations.
5. Congress has "Plenary Power" over all Native nations today.
6. The Plenary Power Doctrine stems from the U.S.'s acknowledgement that Native nations are independent from the U.S. and therefore not subject to federal law.

CALIFORNIA STATE GOVERNMENT

1. Cases that have been decided upon by the California State Supreme Court cannot be appealed.
2. The U.S. federal government has the power to add new states to the country.
3. California does not have a state senate.
4. U.S. States have their own Constitutions that regulate how the state is governed.
5. State governments work like "mini" federal governments. For example, the state of California has three branches of government, just like the U.S. federal government.
6. Unlike the U.S. government which has a bicameral legislature, the California state government has a tricameral legislature (i.e. "three houses").

FEDERALISM - 1

(true or False)

1) If federal law requires employers to offer at least 6 weeks of parental leave, the state of California could require employers in the state to offer at least 12 weeks of parental leave.

2) If the U.S. Constitution guarantees a right (such as women's suffrage), the U.S. president can issue an executive order that overturns it.

3) If the U.S. Constitution doesn't say anything about an issue (e.g., minimum wage), the federal government can regulate it however it wants.

4)If California state law says that sales tax in the state cannot be higher than 5%, the city of San Francisco can allow retailers to charge 10% in sales tax.

5)A state law can violate a federal law if the state law doesn't violate the U.S. Constitution.

FEDERALISM - 2

//

Choose True or False for the following statements:

//

//

Notes

• Roe v. Wade (1973) was a U.S. Supreme Court case. The Court ruled that the U.S. Constitution guaranteed the right to abortion. Abortion became a Constitutional right.
• Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health (2022) was a U.S. Supreme Court case that overturnedRoe v. Wade (1973). InDobbs, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that the U.S. Constitution does NOT guarantee the right to abortion. Now abortion is NOT a Constitutional right.
• The state of California passed an amendment to its state Constitution guaranteeing the right of people in California to access abortion.

1)The decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health (2022) made abortion illegal.

2)Since the 2022 Dobbs decision, the federal government has had the ability to ban abortion in all 50 states.

3) Because California's state Constitution guarantees the right to an abortion, people in California will still be able to access abortion even if the federal government makes it illegal.

4)The decision in Roe v. Wade (1973) made it so the federal government couldn't ban abortion, even if it wanted to.

5)Now that Roe v. Wade (1973) has been overturned, states can make abortion illegal.

FEDERALISM - Tribal Sovereignty

(true or false)

1. A federally recognized tribe could legalize murder as long as it occurs on tribal land.
2. A federally recognized tribe may grow and sell marijuana on their land.
3. Public Law 280 changed where tribal sovereignty fits under the hierarchy of federal and state law.
4. A federally recognized tribe may operate a casino on their land even if that land is within a state that has criminalized gambling (ignore PL 280).

CRIMINAL / CIVIL JURISDICTION

(true or False)

1)A case called The People of the State of California v. Amy Hontalas

2) A case in which Person A is required to pay Person B's medical bills after Person A hit them while skiing.

3)A case in which a person is found guilty and has to pay a fine to the government.

4) A case in which the defendant could not be sent to jail, but could face other consequences.

5) A case in which the defendant might go to jail.

6) A case called Taylor Swift v. Amy Hontalas

7)A case in which society holds a person accountable for breaking a law set by that society.

INDIAN COUNTRY JURISDICTION - 1

//

//

Choose True or False for the following statements:

//

//

Court cases are abbreviated as follows

• "Oliphant" =Oliphant v. Suquamish(1973)
• "Elk v. U.S." =Lavetta Elk v. The United States of America(2009)
• "Dollar General" =Dollar General v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians(2016)

1. Because it is so difficult for tribes to exercise *CRIMINAL* jurisdiction in Indian country, *CIVIL* cases are frequently their only option. Dollar General is essentially a *CIVIL* version of Oliphant.
2. Elk v. U.S. is essentially a *CIVIL* version of Oliphant. It was a major blow to tribal sovereignty when the plaintiff lost their case because it left tribes with fewer options to get justice for Native victims of crime.
3. Elk v. U.S. is a *CRIMINAL* suit which was filed after the plaintiff exhausted every *CIVIL* option possible.
4. If the plaintiff in Dollar General won, tribes would no longer have the option to pursue a *CIVIL* case. Therefore, it was a major victory for tribal sovereignty when the Court ruled on the side of the tribe.

INDIAN COUNTRY JURISDICTION - 2

//

//

Choose True or False for the following statements:

//

//

Notes

• "VAWA" = The 2013/2022 Reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act.
• For questions that reference Public Law 280, ignore all of the weird exceptions (like "unless it is on a highway"). Think of it as all or nothingit either applies or it doesn't.
• "Double Jeopardy" refers to the clause in the 5th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that says that someone can't be tried twice for the same crime.

1. Depending on factors including race and PL 280 status, one or more of the following entities may be involved in the same case if the crime occurred in Indian country: the tribe, a U.S. state, the federal government, the U.S. military.
2. The nature of criminal jurisdiction in Indian country facilitates violence against Native women, especially by non-Native perpetrators.
3. Treaties signed by the U.S. frequently affirmed the sovereign right of Native nations to exercise jurisdiction over the people and activities on their land.
4. Advocates tried to amend VAWA in order to allow tribal police to arrest non-Native people. This effort failed and tribes are still not allowed to arrest non-Native perpetrators under any circumstance.
5. Determining jurisdiction requires you to know the type of land a crime was committed upon (e.g., state land, federal land). The Dawes Act (allotment) made this process difficult in Indian country.
6. Sometimes there is a total jurisdictional void in Indian country in which literally no entity has jurisdiction over a crime.
7. Public Law 280 complicates jurisdiction in Indian country because it introduced the federal government as an entity that might exercise jurisdiction over a crime.

INDIAN CHILD WELFARE

//

//

Choose True or False for the following statements about the Indian Child Welfare Act ("ICWA")

//

Note: when I discuss "tribes" and "children" assume I am talking about federally recognized tribes and children who are considered an "Indian child" under the law.

1. One of the main components of ICWA is the priority placement schedule designed to keep Indian children with their biological family members and connected to their Indigenous culture.
2. One of the main components of ICWA involves protecting tribes by granting tribal jurisdiction over child welfare proceedings.
3. Because the goal of ICWA is to keep children connected to their tribal community, non-Native biological family members are not eligible for priority placement under ICWA.
4. The framers of ICWA wrote the law anticipating that future generations of Indian children might live outside of reservations and be increasingly multi-racial.
5. Opponents of ICWA often argue that the law is racist. This was exemplified in the Dr. Phil episode that we watched.
6. ICWA was passed to address hundreds of years of child separation through various means including boarding schools, foster care, and adoption.
7. In order to qualify for ICWA, an "Indian child" must live on a reservation.
8. Due to ICWA's priority placement schedule, all foster placements and adoptions of Indian children by white families are in some way violations of ICWA.
9. If no biological family member can care for an Indian child, the priority placement schedule dictates that the next option would be for the child to be placed with any Native family