Extending Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction Outside of Indian Country: <i>Kelsey v. Pope</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inherent sovereignty of American Indian tribes, such as the Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, was recognized long before the founding of the United States.In fact, Indian tribal governments are some of the earliest governments in the world. 1 However, the powers and authorities intertwined with inherent sovereignty are neither established nor protected by the United States Constitution. 2Although the structure and responsibilities of tribal governments varied from tribe to tribe, most tribes used some form of authoritative body to facilitate societal control. 3 These governing bodies held tribal members to a certain standard of individual behavior and self-control within the society.Members that did not live up to these standards and tribal norms were punished.Depending on the extent of the deviation, punishments included, but were not limited to, ordering the violator to make a payment to the injured member, banishing the violator, and, in extreme cases, sentencing the violator to death. 4 In short, Indian tribes have possessed and exercised the power to maintain social order over their members for well over two hundred years. 5 This Note will explore the inherent sovereign powers retained by Indian tribes to exercise criminal jurisdiction over tribal members.In particular,
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".