Oral argument transcript posted in Inyo County case

Facebook Twitter
Oral argument transcript posted in Inyo County case
TUESDAY, APRIL 29, 2003

The Supreme Court web site has posted a transcript of the oral argument session for Inyo County v. Bishop Paiute Tribe, No. 02-281.

Paul D. Kirby argued for Inyo County. He argued that state criminal subpoenas can be enforced against tribal governments.

Barbara B. McDowell, a Department of Justice attorney, argued next in part for the county and in part for the Bishop Paiute Tribe. She said tribal governments are not subordinate to state governments but that tribes don't have standing for violations of their civil rights.

Reid Peyton Chambers argued next for the Bishop Paiute Tribe.

As is court practice, the names of the justices who speak are not identified. But the passage that drew most criticism from observers took place between Justice Antonin Scalia and McDowell. Scalia questioned why the U.S. was backing the tribe's "lesser" sovereignty.

"I am perplexed at why -- why the United States wants to accord the -- the tribe's commercial enterprises greater protection than is accorded to England or -- or Germany or any -- any foreign sovereign," he said.

Transcript:
Inyo County v. Bishop Paiute Tribe (March 31, 2003)

Supreme Court Briefs:
Inyo County v. Bishop Paiute Tribe

Decision Below:
BISHOP PAIUTE TRIBE v. COUNTY OF INYO No. 01-15007 (January 4, 2002)

Relevant Documents:
Docket Sheet: No. 02-281 | Senate Testimony: Monty Bengochia on Supreme Court Precedents

Relevant Links:
Paiuite Palace Casino - http://www.paiutepalace.com
Inyo County - http://www.countyofinyo.org

Related Stories:
Supreme Court tussles with tribal sovereignty case (04/01)
Supreme Court case too close to call for some (04/01)
County presses Supreme Court on law enforcement (04/01)
Supreme Court hears sovereignty case (3/31)
Supreme Court panel to discuss Inyo County case (3/31)
Ore. withdraws from states' Supreme Court brief (3/27)
Tribes and states stress cooperation not conflict (02/28)
Tribes enter Supreme Court case (2/25)
Inouye ties sovereignty to homeland security (2/25)
Showdown looms in tribal sovereignty case (02/20)
S.D. tribe to accept state subpoenas (2/19)
S.D. puts pressure on tribal sovereignty (2/12)
Supreme Court work at issue as judge debated (01/30)

Stay Connected

               

Top Stories

1. Bill removes blood quantum requirement for citizens of Five Civilized Tribes
2. Federal court blocks attempt to condemn lands on Navajo Nation
3. Bureau of Indian Affairs opens listening sessions on reorganization
4. Trump administration ready to let Cobell program run out of funds
5. President Trump confirms Indian Country's fears with budget request

About This Page

You are enjoying stories from the Indianz.Com Archive, a collection dating back to 2000. Some outgoing links may no longer work due to age.

All stories are available for publishing via Creative Commons License: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)