The Locator -- [(subject = "Oklahoma")]

3076 records matched your query       


Record 84 | Previous Record | Long Display | Next Record
02596aam a2200289 i 4500
001 220EC2E4440211EF98CC15ED37ECA4DB
003 SILO
005 20240717010108
008 240702s2021    pau      b    000 0 eng d
035    $a (OCoLC)1443543511
040    $a LUI $b eng $e rda $c LUI $d SILO
100 1  $a Berger, Bethany R., $e author.
245 10 $a McGirt v. Oklahoma and the past, present, and future of reservation boundaries / $c Bethany R. Berger.
246 17 $a Reservation boundaries
246 18 $a McGirt v. Oklahoma & the past, present, & future ...
264  1 $a Philadelphia, Pennsylvania : $b University of Pennsylvania review, $c [2021]
300    $a pages 250-292 ; $c 29 cm
504    $a Includes bibliographical references.
520    $a ""Unlawful acts, performed long enough and with sufficient vigor, are never enough to amend the law." So reads McGirt v. Oklahoma, the most important reservation boundary case in the history of the Supreme Court. But before McGirt, courts often rewarded unlawful acts with reservation diminishment. This Essay first places McGirt in the context of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation's century-long fight to restore sovereign rights illegally denied after allotment, and the even longer fight by the Muscogee Nation and others to survive a trail of broken treaty promises. It then corrects the false assumptions about the past and present of reservation boundaries that led the Court to turn lawbreaking into law. As to the past, I show that the allotment-era Congress knew that reservations did not depend on land tenure, and that its statutes distinguished between allotment acts that diminished reservations and those that did not. States, however, regularly broke the law, asserting jurisdiction in violation of federal Indian law rules. Before McGirt, the Court wrongly assumed that "[t]he notion that reservation status of Indian lands might not be coextensive with tribal ownership was unfamiliar at the turn of the century," and so justified relying on state violations of tribal sovereignty as "evidence" of congressional intent."
580    $a Offprint: University of Pennsylvania law review online. Volume 169 (2020-2022)
650  0 $a Creek Indians $x History. $z Oklahoma $x History.
650  0 $a Land tenure $x Law and legislation $z Muscogee (Creek) Nation.
650  0 $a Creek Indians $x Government relations.
787 1  $t University of Pennsylvania law review online $g Volume 169 (2020-2022) $w (OCoLC)888526182
941    $a 1
952    $l OVUX522 $d 20240717014618.0
956    $a http://locator.silo.lib.ia.us/search.cgi?index_0=id&term_0=220EC2E4440211EF98CC15ED37ECA4DB

Initiate Another SILO Locator Search

This resource is supported by the Institute of Museum and Library Services under the provisions of the Library Services and Technology Act as administered by State Library of Iowa.