On Power and the Law: McGirt<scp>v</scp>. Oklahoma

Blackhawk, Maggie

doi:10.1086/715493

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…190 Blackhawk is critical of this approach that remained rooted in a dominant ideology that sought to restrict the textual recognition and impact of Native sovereignty. 191 In contrast, in Solem v Bartlett, the Supreme Court concluded that three principles would evaluate the existence of any Congressional intent to diminish the borders of a Native reservation. 192 First, the Court affirmed that an explicit provision from Congress is required to diminish the boundary of a reservation.…”

Section: United Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Litigation and Historical-Structural Injustices

2023

Transitional Justice and the Historical Abuses of Church and State

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Litigation has proved a significant but limited tool in addressing historicalstructural injustices. Litigation is a central site where the four dimensions of power are contested by parties to a case. Criminal law, civil litigation, canon law, and international human rights law have all played a role in addressing these abuses to date, but each has proven limited in its ability to provide a victim-survivor-centred process. Section 7.2 provides an overview of the intended functions of different forms of litigation; Section 7.3 assesses these forms across the four dimensions of power and emotion; Section 7.4 considers the different national experiences of employing litigation to address historicalstructural injustices and in particular examines how high-profile victories for survivors are nonetheless circumscribed in their subsequent implementation by governments. Section 7.5 concludes by framing the appropriate expectations for the role of litigation in addressing historical-structural injustices. litigating historical-structural injusticesLitigation can take a variety of forms relevant to historical-structural injustices, including individual criminal responsibility, institutional and state responsibility in civil litigation or international human rights law, and responsibility of individual Roman Catholic priests in canon law. In transitional justice, such litigation typically operates in a context of widespread or systemic harms, with the result that the vast majority of perpetrators will not be prosecuted, 1 due to the limitations of time, capacity, and resources. In a context of limited 1

show abstract

Section: United Statesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Litigation and Historical-Structural Injustices

2023

Transitional Justice and the Historical Abuses of Church and State

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

On Power and the Law: McGirtv. Oklahoma

Cited by 1 publication

References 7 publications

Litigation and Historical-Structural Injustices

Litigation and Historical-Structural Injustices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About