Document Type
Article
Publication Date
Summer 1982
Publication Information
31 CATH. U.L. REV. 635 (1982)
Abstract
The Mitchell decision has been criticized appropriately as breaking with precedent on both Court of Claims jurisdiction and Indian trust law. Assuming this break with tradition was intentional, however, this article will focus on Mitchell's effects on breach of trust litigation in the Court of Claims and the federal district courts. To provide an understanding of the state of the law at the time Mitchell was decided, the article begins with a discussion of the influential breach of trust cases decided before Mitchell. Next, Justice Marshall's analysis in the majority opinion will be examined in fuller detail. The article will then turn to an analysis of Mitchell's effects. Focusing on Tucker Act claims, a two-pronged analysis will be employed. First, the previous breach of trust cases based on the Tucker Act will be reexamined to ascertain whether any of these cases could meet the stricter tests enunciated in Mitchell. Second, three Tucker Act cases decided by the Court of Claims after Mitchell will be analyzed: one attempting to avoid Mitchell and two others holding that more specific statutes meet the requirement of Mitchell. Focusing next on claims for equitable relief, decisions relying on Mitchell will be analyzed and contrasted with similar claims made before Mitchell. Finally, conclusions will be drawn from this analysis regarding the broader implications for Indian law and policy that may flow from Mitchell.
Recommended Citation
Nell J. Newton,
Enforcing the Federal-Indian Trust Relationship After Mitchell,
31 CATH. U.L. REV. 635 (1982).
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.nd.edu/law_faculty_scholarship/1201