Tribal Courts: Custom and Innovative Law
![handle is hein.journals/nmlr24 and id is 235 raw text is: TRIBAL COURTS: CUSTOM AND INNOVATIVE LAW
GLORIA VALENCIA-WEBER*
INTRODUCTION ..................................................... 225
I. THE PERSISTING THIRD SOVEREIGN .................... 227
A. The Indigenous Third Sovereign ............................ 227
B. Federal and State Relationships With Tribes ........... 230
II. TRIBAL COURTS, CUSTOM, AND COMMON LAW.. 231
A. Tribal Courts ..................................................... 231
B. The Legitimacy of Tribal Courts ........................... 237
C. Custom and Indian Law ...................................... 244
D. Custom in Indian Law Decisions ........................... 249
1. Selected Tribal Court Decisions ........................ 249
2. Federal Indian Law and Custom ...................... 255
III. TRIBAL CUSTOMARY LAW: ENGINE FOR INNO-
VATIVE LAW ......................................................... 256
CONCLUSION ......................................................... 262
INTRODUCTION
Law and jurisprudence in the United States have always included a
third sovereign, the American Indian tribes.' The federal government and
the states, the other two sovereigns, and their relations with the indigenous
nations do not comprise the content of the legal dialogue. The law and
jurisprudence developed by the Indian nations to serve their needs as
self-governing political states continues the evolution which predated the
European invasion of the Americas. The multiplying interactions among
the sovereigns and the increasing exercise of sovereign power by the
American Indian nations have intensified the need for non-Indians to
learn and appreciate tribal customary law.
* Assistant Professor, University of New Mexico School of Law. B.A., M.A., Oklahoma State
University; J.D. Harvard Law School. The author appreciates the encouragement provided by Philip
S. Deloria, Leslie Espinoza, Vicki Limas, Kirke Kickingbird, Arvo Q. Mikkanen, Margaret Montoya,
Michael Olivas, James Ronda, Judith Royster, Antoinette Sedillo-Lopez, Gerald Torres, Robert J.
Williams, Jr., Robert J. Weber, and the members of the Oklahoma Indian Bar Association. Their
insights enriched me; of course, the views expressed are my responsibility. Assistance was provided
by student researchers Suzanne Berry, Ken Factor, and Shannon Oliver.
I. The term American Indian includes American Indians and Alaskan Natives for the purposes
of this paper. Alaskan Natives, Aleuts, Inuits, and others maintain distinct cultural identities. These
distinctions are not pursttd in this discussion of American Indian law and law school practices.
The term tribe is also used for general discussion though the indigenous nations use varied terms
for their collective identity, e.g., nation, pueblo, band, community, rancheria, colony, and village.
The most recent listing of entities that are federally recognized demonstrates the variety of self-
designations used by the indigenous nations. See Notice, 58 Fed. Reg. 54364 (1993). Also, Native
Hawaiians comprise an indigenous people whose status evokes issues and doctrines from American
Indian jurisprudence. See Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, Pub. L. No. 34, 42 Stat. 108 (1921),
which established a land trust for the rehabilitation of Hawaiian Natives, subsequently amended
and incorporated into the constitution of the state of Hawaii; see also FELIX S. COHEN, FELIX S.
COHEN's HANDBOOK OF FEDERAL INDIAN LAW 797-810 (1982 ed.) [hereinafter COHEN'S HANDBOOK].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/nmlr24&div=19&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Tribal Courts: Custom and Innovative Law
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most