Abstract
The federal Indian law doctrine of Congressional plenary power is long overdue for an overhaul. Since its troubling nineteenth-century origins in Kagama v. United States (1886), plenary power has justified invasive Congressional interventions and undermined Tribal sovereignty. The doctrine's legal basis remains a constitutional conundrum. This Article considers the Court's recent engagement with plenary power in Haaland v. Brackeen (2023). It argues that the Brackeen opinions may signal judicial readiness to reevaluate the doctrine. The Article takes ahold of Justice Gorsuch's critical assessment and runs with it, ultimately proposing a method for cleaning up this destructive and constitutionally dubious line of caselaw.
Recommended Citation
M. H. Ishtani & Alexandra Fay,
Revising the Indian Plenary Power Doctrine,
29
Mich. J. Race & L.
1
(2024).
Available at:
https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjrl/vol29/iss1/2
