Sending a message to Dollar General and the U.S. Supreme Court. Photo from Quilt Walk for Justice / Facebook
Retired professor Peter d'Errico doesn't think tribal interests have presented the strongest case in Dollar General Corporation v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, a tribal jurisdiction case being heard today by the U.S. Supreme Court:
Make no mistake: the doctrine of Christian Discovery lies at the foundation of the idea that the US has an "overriding sovereignty" over Indians and that Indian self-government is limited to "internal tribal matters." The notion that the US Congress has power to define Indian government—sometimes referred to as the "plenary power" of Congress—also rests on "Christian Discovery" doctrine. I venture to suggest that the Choctaw and their amicus allies fail to challenge the fundamental doctrines of federal Indian law out of fear. After all, despite the overall subordination of Indian nations, there remain elements of Indian sovereignty that have not been denied. The US Supreme Court has issued rulings that appear "pro-Indian" in certain cases, like the "exceptions" in the Montana decision. The thinking likely goes, "Don't rock the boat with a fundamental challenge. Take the safe course and pray for the court to let us alone and leave us to our political program in Congress." Unfortunately for this line of least resistance, the anti-Indian parties play hardball. They have nothing to lose from pushing the fundamental logic of "diminished sovereignty" to its logical conclusion.Get the Story:
Peter d'Errico: The Dollar General Case: Anti-Indians Play Hardball, Indians Play Softball (Indian Country Today 12/5) Also Today:
Dollar General seeks tribal suit ban in Miss. Choctaw case (AP 12/5)
Supreme Court case draws Tulalip’s attention (The Everett Herald 12/4)
Join the Conversation
Related Stories
Mike Myers: Tribal
jurisdiction opponents flock to Supreme Court (12/04) Native women schedule Quilt Walk for Justice at Supreme Court (12/01)
Steven Newcomb: Language of domination persists in Indian law (12/1)
Steven Newcomb: Even the media treats our nations as 'nothing' (11/27)
Ned Blackhawk: Supreme Court case jeopardizes tribal rights (11/25)
Peter d'Errico: Anti-Indian wars continue in our Supreme Court (11/24)
Native women to rally at Supreme Court for upcoming case (11/11)
DOJ to help with arguments in Supreme Court jurisdiction case (11/09)
Native women defend tribal jurisdiction in Supreme Court case (10/26)
Tribes urged to bring states on board for Supreme Court case (10/20)
Cheyenne & Arapaho Tribal Tribune: Supreme Court case tests tribal jurisdiction (10/14)
Supreme Court schedules oral arguments in two Indian law cases (10/12)
States oppose tribal jurisdiction in upcoming Supreme Court case (10/07)
Supreme Court rejects petitions in four more Indian law cases (10/05)
Supreme Court agrees to hear Omaha Reservation boundary case (10/02)
Supreme Court considers petitions in slew of Indian law cases (09/22)
Bryan Newland: The racist foundation of Supreme Court rulings (09/08)
Supreme Court agrees to hear first tribal jurisdiction case in years (06/15)
Supreme Court needs more time to review tribal jurisdiction case (6/8)
SCOTUSBlog: DOJ urges denial of petition in tribal court dispute (05/20)
DOJ files brief in tribal jurisdiction case before Supreme Court (5/14)
Updates from National Congress of American Indians DC meeting (2/27)
Updates from National Congress of American Indians winter session (2/26)
Supreme Court asks DOJ for views in Mississippi Choctaw case (10/06)
