IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v53y2023i3p405-434..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta

Author

Listed:
  • Kirsten Matoy Carlson

Abstract

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta has the potential to rework the long-standing division of authority among federal, state, and tribal governments. In issuing its decision in this June 2022 case, the majority departed from its previous decisions and congressional policy by enabling state governments to exercise criminal authority over non-Indians in Indian Country. This article examines the implications of Castro-Huerta for federal, tribal, and state governments on the ground in Indian Country as well as for scholarship and teaching on federal–tribal–state relations.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirsten Matoy Carlson, 2023. "Dividing Authority Three Ways: Federal–Tribal–State Relations after Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 53(3), pages 405-434.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:53:y:2023:i:3:p:405-434.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/publius/pjad020
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kalt, Joseph Peggs & Cornell, Stephen, 2010. "American Indian Self-Determination: The Political Economy of a Policy that Works," Scholarly Articles 4553307, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    2. Richard C. Witmer & Joshua Johnson & Frederick J. Boehmke, 2014. "American Indian Policy in the States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1043-1063, December.
    3. Erich Steinman, 2004. "American Federalism and Intergovernmental Innovation in State-Tribal Relations," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 34(2), pages 95-114, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Donna L. Feir, 2016. "The long‐term effects of forcible assimilation policy: The case of Indian boarding schools," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 433-480, May.
    2. Richard C. Witmer & Joshua Johnson & Frederick J. Boehmke, 2014. "American Indian Policy in the States," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1043-1063, December.
    3. Raymond Foxworth & Amy H. Liu & Anand Edward Sokhey, 2015. "Incorporating Native American History into the Curriculum: Descriptive Representation or Campaign Contributions?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(4), pages 955-969, December.
    4. Raymond Orr & Darren Calhoun & Carolyn Noonan & Ron Whitener & Jeff Henderson & Jack Goldberg & Patrica Nez Henderson, 2013. "A History of Ashes: An 80 Year Comparative Portrait of Smoking Initiation in American Indians and Non-Hispanic Whites—the Strong Heart Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Rodney Nelson, 2019. "Beyond Dependency: Economic Development, Capacity Building, and Generational Sustainability for Indigenous People in Canada," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(3), pages 21582440198, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:53:y:2023:i:3:p:405-434.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.