On July 9, 2020, SCOTUS issued an important ruling in a case that combined geography, history, and law in one important setting: Do Indian Nations with Treaty Rights exist as sovereign nations as various Treaties from the 1800s so stated?  The answer by a divided (5-4) Supreme Court was yes; this case is far more important than most press accounts now state. . Treaty Laws passed over 100 years ago have now come into focus: The decision by SCOTUS this week establishes that the Creek Nation Tribe are sovereign; a state criminal conviction for a violent sex crime against a minor was set aside as a result.  What else may no longer be valid?   If an Indian Tribe is a sovereign nation under a Treaty, then a state has no jurisdiction over the Tribe's citizens; who then enforces state law on those Tribal lands?  Are those Treaty-protected Tribal lands able to operate as, in effect, separate nations.  Jack Russo and Professor Bob Acker share their views on the differing majority and dissenting opinions on the role of Treaties under our Constitution and how bad facts in a particular case can impact different views of law regardless of geography and history.  Will Indian Nations now have the ability to build on this or will we see some Congressional renegotiation of Treaties that have been on the books for over a century. 

 

Click HERE to read more about the Supreme Court's decision.