About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

30 Am. Indian L. Rev. 151 (2005-2006)
Conflicts in Sovereignty: The Narragansett Tribe in Rhode Island

handle is hein.journals/aind30 and id is 161 raw text is: NOTES CONFLICTS IN SOVEREIGNTY: THE NARRAGANSETT TRIBE IN RHODE ISLAND Bryan J. Nowlin* American Indian tribal sovereignty is important to both tribal members and the states in which they reside. Historically, the line between tribal sovereignty and state jurisdiction is not easy to find. Jurisdictional conflicts are a sign of healthy sovereigns, as a weak sovereign cannot defend against encroachments upon its jurisdiction. The federal courts have greatly increased the scope of tribal sovereignty in several cases, notably clarifying state tax exemptions.' Congress has also played a role in re-establishing defunct tribes as sovereign entities and passing statutes such as the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 that clarify tribal rights to operate enterprises without state government interference.2 The United States Supreme Court clarified federal law further stating that a state government may prohibit all gambling as a matter of public policy. It may not, however, allow some gambling while disallowing Indian gambling because that would essentially be a regulatory act.' Re-establishing a tribe is the ultimate act of jurisdictional re-balancing in favor of tribal sovereignty. After all, a weak jurisdiction cannot defend against encroachment any more than a moribund jurisdiction could bring itself back to life. Frequently these re-established tribes are not immediately given the same full status as other tribal sovereignties. The Narragansett Tribe of Rhode Island is just one such reestablished Tribe that now seeks to assert its full sovereign rights. Roger Williams, the founder of Rhode Island, initially purchased land from the tribe but as the number of colonists grew, friction with the tribe grew proportionately.4 Rhode Island and the Narragansett have a long and tumultuous history, including a war in 1675 in which the colonists defeated the Narragansett.5 The Tribe claims that the * Third-year student, University of Oklahoma College of Law. Editor-in-chief, American Indian Law Review. B.A. Boston College, 2002. 1. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n v. Chickasaw Nation, 515 U.S. 450 (1995). 2. Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2701 (2000). 3. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202, 209-11 (1987). 4. Jack L. Davis, Roger Williams Among the Narragansett Indians, 43 NEWENGLANDQ. 593, 598-99 (1970). 5. Ethel Boissevain, The Detribalization of the Narragansett Indians: A Case Study, 3 ETHN-NOHSTORY 225, 226 (1956).

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most