Summary

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation… (1989)

While Justice WHITE's opinion misreads the Court's decisions defining the limits of inherent tribal sovereignty, Justice STEVENS' opinion disregards those decisions altogether. By grounding the Tribe's authority to zone non-Indian fee lands exclusively in its power to exclude non-Indians from the reservation, and by refusing even to consider whether the Tribe's inherent authority might support the zoning of non-Indian fee lands in the "open area," Justice STEVENS' opinion appears implicitly to conclude that tribes have no inherent authority over non-Indians on reservation lands.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Harry Blackmun Harry Blackmun Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation… (1989)

Surely, in considering whether Congress intended tribes to enjoy civil jurisdiction, including zoning authority, over non-Indian fee lands in reservation areas where non-Indian ownership predominates, this Court should direct its attention not to the intent of the Congress that passed the Dawes Act, but rather to the intent of the Congress that repudiated the Dawes Act, and established the Indian policies to which we are heir.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature