| Descript |
301 p |
| Note |
Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 55-10, Section: A, page: 3307 |
|
Adviser: James Farr |
|
Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Minnesota, 1994 |
|
This project provides a new historical and logical justification for the canons of construction used by American courts when interpreting and applying ambiguous provisions in Indian treaties and statutes concerned with Indian affairs. These canons, usually presented as a function of the federal trustee power over Indians, are better considered as a domestic application of the 18th century law of nations, principles regarding the interpretation of treaties. This new conception of the canons better fits a model of Indian affairs that looks to a mutual respect between sovereigns rather than a model of dependence. It is possible to link this rethinking of the canons with work being done on "treaty federalism" and indigenous rights, and with the general revitalization of interest in tribal identity among Native Americans. Such a reconsideration of Indian affairs helps American society move from an atmosphere of litigation to one of negotiation, and from the realm of law to that of politics |
|
School code: 0130 |
|
DDC |
| Host Item |
Dissertation Abstracts International 55-10A
|
| Subject |
Law
|
|
Political Science, General
|
|
Sociology, Ethnic and Racial Studies
|
|
0398
|
|
0615
|
|
0631
|
| Alt Author |
University of Minnesota
|
|
