Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Under Public Law 280, 2003-2005 [United States]

Goldberg, Carole; Champagne, Duane

doi:10.3886/icpsr34557.v1

Cited by 6 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We find that PL280 status is robustly negatively associated with median family income. Our results resonate with the existing body of legal scholarship that has long been pointing to PL280's negative socioeconomic effects (see, e.g., Goldberg 2010;Goldberg & Champagne 2006;Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008;Goldberg-Ambrose 1997;Herzberg 1978;Jiménez & Song 1998;Leonhard 2012;Twetten 2000). With its "near elimination of exclusive tribal authority over a range of less serious offenses by tribal members" (Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008: 6), PL280 has been "viewed by many as an infringement on inherent sovereignty of affected tribes" (ibid.…”

supporting

confidence: 89%

“…was seen as a good candidate for budget cuts because the ideology of the time favored assimilation and formal equality" (Goldberg & Champagne 2006: 702). Thus, PL280 in effect transferred jurisdiction to the states without providing the states with any additional funding (Gardner & Pecos Melton 2004;Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008). Moreover, funding for tribal courts was significantly reduced (Twetten 2000).…”

Section: Consequences Of Pl280: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In sum, PL280, on the one hand, eroded the powers of the local community to deal with crime and social problems and, on the other hand, provided enough ambiguity for authorities not to deal effectively with enforcement on reservations (Goldberg & Champagne 2006: 708). 7 The "jurisdictional gaps and vacuums" (Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008: 11) created by PL280 likely contributed to the observed absence of law and order (Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008;Goldberg-Ambrose 1997).…”

Section: Consequences Of Pl280: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…1 Congress passed PL280 in 1953. The law transferred jurisdictional authority over criminal and civil matters from the federal government to the states, and expanded state jurisdiction beyond the scope of federal jurisdiction prior to the enactment of the law (Deloria & Lytle 1983;Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008), in selected parts of "Indian country." The change of jurisdiction disrupted the functioning of the legal system in the impacted areas, resulting in a "chaotic allocation of law enforcement authority" (Clinton 1976: 504-05).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Legal scholars have expressed much interest in PL280 and its possible long-term consequences Goldberg & Champagne 2006;Goldberg, Champagne, & Singleton 2008;Goldberg-Ambrose 1997;Herzberg 1978;Jiménez & Song 1998;Leonhard 2012;Twetten 2000). However, empirical literature on the impact of PL280 is limited to less than a handful of contributions (Anderson & Parker 2008;Cookson 2010Cookson , 2012Parker 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Jurisdiction, Crime, and Development: The Impact of Public Law 280 in Indian Country

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Consequences Of Pl280: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Consequences Of Pl280: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Jurisdiction, Crime, and Development: The Impact of Public Law 280 in Indian Country

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpersonal Violence and American Indian and Alaska Native Communities

Palmer¹,

Chino

2016

The Wiley Handbook on the Psychology of Violence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The chronic uncertainty of American Indian property rights

Alston

Crepelle

Law

et al. 2021

Journal of Institutional Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Property institutions should ideally provide economic actors with certainty that their local choices about investment will not be unsettled by shifting political economic equilibria. We argue that for this to occur, political autonomy, administrative and enforcement capacity, political constraints, and accessible legal institutions are each necessary. A comparison of the evolution of property rights for settlers and American Indians in the United States shows how political and legal forces shape the evolution of property institutions. American Indians, who had property institutions before Europeans arrived, could not defend their land from Europeans and later Americans due to lacking military capacity. Settlers' property rights were relatively secure because the government had sufficient autonomy and capacity to broadly define and enforce their rights, political institutions constrained the government from expropriating settlers' property, and legal institutions provided a forum for settlers to adjudicate and defend their rights in court. Native Americans, in contrast, had systematically inconsistent and often expropriative policy treatment by the government. Although tribes have technically been sovereign since the 1970s, tribal governments continue to lack sufficient political and legal autonomy and capacity to define and enforce property institutions in response to evolving local conditions.

show abstract

Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Under Public Law 280, 2003-2005 [United States]

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Jurisdiction, Crime, and Development: The Impact of Public Law 280 in Indian Country

Jurisdiction, Crime, and Development: The Impact of Public Law 280 in Indian Country

Interpersonal Violence and American Indian and Alaska Native Communities

The chronic uncertainty of American Indian property rights

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About