Skip to Navigation | Skip to Content | Leap to Bottom

Dollar General v. Choctaw: Cherry-picking Indian Sovereignty -


Dollar General v. Choctaw: Cherry-picking Indian Sovereignty - The Dollar General lawyer denied the Choctaw position: "That is not correct." Moments later, responding to a question from Justice Ginsburg, the lawyer said, "Everyone agrees that the Tribes have a form of [civil jurisdiction] upon consent. They don't have it inherently."

One expects the opposing party to deny one's arguments. No surprise. The inauspicious note stems from the part of the Choctaw argument Dollar General didn't deny: namely, the notion that "the Tribes entered the United States and were incorporated into [the] country." Dollar General didn't deny that part of the Choctaw argument because it agrees with it.

Read the full article … 

Dispatch: Aboriginal Press Media Group  |   Permalink  |   [19.12.15]  |   0 comments


»  {Newer-Posts} {Older-Posts}  «


Post a Comment

Links to this posting:

Create a Link

 / 19.12.15 / 2015/12/#8549923000620854692

Aboriginal News Group

Contributing Editors, International Correspondents & Affiliates

This is an Ad-Free Newswire

Southern Poverty Law Center

This site uses the Blogspot Platform


Inteligenta Indigena Novajoservo™ (IIN) is maintained by the Aboriginal Press News Service™ (APNS) a subset of the Aboriginal News Group™ (ANG). All material provided here is for informational purposes only, including all original editorials, news items and related post images, is published under a CC: Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 license (unless otherwise stated) and/or 'Fair Use', via section 107 of the US Copyright Law). This publication is autonomous; stateless and non-partisan. We refuse to accept paid advertising, swag, or monetary donations and assume no liability for the content and/or hyperlinked data of any other referenced website. The APNS-ANG and its affiliate orgs do not advocate, encourage or condone any type/form of illegal and/or violent behaviour.