Montana v. United States
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Montana_v._United_States an entity of type: Thing
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), was a Supreme Court case that addressed two issues: (1) Whether the title of the Big Horn Riverbed rested with the United States, in trust for the Crow Nation or passed to the State of Montana upon becoming a state and (2) Whether Crow Nation retained the power to regulate hunting and fishing on tribal lands owned in fee-simple by a non-tribal member. First, the Court held that Montana held title to the Big Horn Riverbed because the Equal Footing Doctrine required the United States to pass title to the newly incorporated State. Second, the Court held that Crow Nation lacked the power to regulate nonmember hunting and fishing on fee-simple land owned by nonmembers, but within the bounds of its reservation. More broadly, the Court held that Trib
rdf:langString
rdf:langString
Montana v. United States
rdf:langString
Montana, et al. v. United States, et al.
xsd:integer
24539740
xsd:integer
1118021672
rdf:langString
Blackmun
rdf:langString
Brennan, Marshall
rdf:langString
Burger, White, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens
rdf:langString
Crow treaties,
<second>
172800.0
<second>
17280.0
xsd:integer
544
xsd:integer
450
xsd:gMonthDay
--12-03
xsd:integer
1980
rdf:langString
Montana v. United States,
xsd:gMonthDay
--03-24
xsd:integer
1981
rdf:langString
Montana, et al. v. United States, et al.
rdf:langString
Indian tribes generally do not possess the power to regulate the activities of non-Indians even if those activities occur on Indian lands.
rdf:langString
Montana v. United States
rdf:langString
Stewart
rdf:langString
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), was a Supreme Court case that addressed two issues: (1) Whether the title of the Big Horn Riverbed rested with the United States, in trust for the Crow Nation or passed to the State of Montana upon becoming a state and (2) Whether Crow Nation retained the power to regulate hunting and fishing on tribal lands owned in fee-simple by a non-tribal member. First, the Court held that Montana held title to the Big Horn Riverbed because the Equal Footing Doctrine required the United States to pass title to the newly incorporated State. Second, the Court held that Crow Nation lacked the power to regulate nonmember hunting and fishing on fee-simple land owned by nonmembers, but within the bounds of its reservation. More broadly, the Court held that Tribes could not exercise regulatory authority over nonmembers on fee-simple land within the reservation unless (1) the nonmember entered a "consensual relationship" with the Tribe or its members or (2) the nonmember's "conduct threatens or has some direct effect on the political integrity, the economic security, or the health or welfare of the tribe." The Supreme Court in Montana v. United States set a precedent which resulted in a wave of litigation challenging not only the exercise of tribal court authority over non-members, but the very existence of that authority.
rdf:langString
Stevens
xsd:nonNegativeInteger
24836
