Home > Articles about Justice O'Connor > A Woman of the West, But Not the Tribes: Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and the State-Tribe Relationship

A Woman of the West, But Not the Tribes: Justice Sandra Day O’Connor and the State-Tribe Relationship

January 1, 2012

ITEM DETAILS

Type: Law review article
Author: Richard L. Barnes
Source: Loy. L. Rev.
Citation: 58 Loy. L. Rev. 39 (2012)
Date is approximate: Yes
58LoyLRev39-nofirst.png

DISCLAIMER: This text has been transcribed automatically and may contain substantial inaccuracies due to the limitations of automatic transcription technology. This transcript is intended only to make the content of this document more easily discoverable and searchable. If you would like to quote the exact text of this document in any piece of work or research, please view the original using the link above and gather your quote directly from the source. The Sandra Day O'Connor Institute does not warrant, represent, or guarantee in any way that the text below is accurate.

A WOMAN OF THE WEST, BUT NOT THE TRIBES: JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O’CONNOR AND THE STATE-TRIBE RELATIONSHIP

Richard L. Barnes*

INTRODUCTION

Sandra Day O’Connor was the first woman appointed to the United States Supreme Court. As a first-in-category appointee to the Court, her historical role is assured. This Article examines one piece of that legacy: Is it plausible to find some of her character as a “first” in her opinions for the Court in Indian cases? Specifically, does a legacy of categorical pioneering exist in the Justice’s treatment of American Indians in her Supreme Court opinions?

Any prediction as to outcome would be shaky if based on tribal interests alone, but the examination below shows something at least as valuable.1 Her overall approach to the federal-state power balance deeply affected her opinions in the area of federal Indian law.

It appears that her overt concern was about the federal state balance, a federalism concern, and one that deeply affected her view of the tribal-state balance. Many of the opinions examined below are foreshadowed by the structure of the Justice’s opinions. Those that rested on doctrines of federal-state power allocation, such as preemption, were likely to be a loss for the tribe in its role as surrogate for federal power. This tribe-as-

* The Leonard B. Melvin, Jr., Distinguished Lecturer in Law and Professor of Law at the University of Mississippi School of Law. My thanks to Dean Richard Gershon and the Lamar Order for continuing

© COPYRIGHT NOTICE: This Media Coverage / Article constitutes copyrighted material. The excerpt above is provided here for research purposes only under the terms of fair use (17 U.S.C. § 107). To view the complete original, please visit Heinonline.org