23 83 PUB. L. NO. 280, supra note 15 (this regulation did not transfer to the states the criminal jurisdiction exercised by the federal government pursuant to criminal laws of general applicability). It also did not confer any civil regulatory authority to the states. See generally, DUANE CHAMPAGNE & CAROLE GOLDBERG, CAPTURED JUSTICE: NATIVE NATIONS AND PUBLIC LAW 280 (2012). 24 See Duro v. Reina, 495 U.S. 676, 679 (1990) (The Court had previously ruled that Indian tribes did not have criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians). But see Oliphant v.

No abstract

In previous writings, I have argued that the Court was conscious that the tribes were being incorporated as the third Sovereign into our federalism but was also aware that Congress was either unwilling or incapable of adjusting the parameters governing this incorporation. To counter this perceived Congressional paralysis, the Court assumed the lead in defining the terms of this tribal incorporation.