Whatever Happened To The Seveloff Fix?
This Article suggests that the Supreme Court has not deprived Alaska Native Villages of a valid basis for claiming the authority to create and enforce their own tribal alcohol regulations. Every federally recognized Alaskan Native Village is situated in an area over which Congress extended the feder...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Duke University School of Law
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/alr/vol32/iss1/3 https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1490&context=alr |
| Summary: | This Article suggests that the Supreme Court has not deprived Alaska Native Villages of a valid basis for claiming the authority to create and enforce their own tribal alcohol regulations. Every federally recognized Alaskan Native Village is situated in an area over which Congress extended the federal Indian liquor laws in 1873, in an enactment Congress has never repealed; this should logically empower Alaska Native Villages to exercise the same federally-delegated authority within their federal Indian liquor law Indian country as lower-48 tribes have within their reservations or “dependent Indian communities.” Since this delegated authority is shared with the states, this postulate does not deprive the State of Alaska of any authority to enforce its own liquor laws; liquor transactions must conform to both state law and applicable tribal law. |
|---|