Lobbying as a Strategy for Tribal Resilience
Vol: 2018, Issue: 6, Page: 1159-1230
2019
- 1,649Usage
- 5Mentions
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage1,649
- Downloads1,354
- 1,354
- Abstract Views295
- Mentions5
- News Mentions5
- News5
Most Recent News
Supreme Court reversed 200 years of U.S. law & tradition upholding tribal sovereignty in its latest term
11:11 am Kirsten Matoy Carlson Wayne State University/The Conversation Over the past 50 years, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court have increasingly diverged in how
Article Description
Indian tribes have endured as separate governments despite the taking of their land, the forced relocation of their people, and the abrogation of their treaty rights. Many threats to tribal existence have stemmed from federal policies aimed at assimilating Indians into mainstream American society. In crafting these policies, members of Congress often relied on the input of non-Indians, including the Bureau of Indian Affairs. As a result, American Indians were largely left out of the federal policy–making process. This started to change in the 1970s when Congress adopted the Tribal Self-Determination Policy, which encouraged tribal participation in the creation of federal Indian policy. Tribes have responded to this opening of the political process by increasingly lobbying Congress. This Article explores how tribes have used legislative strategies to influence federal Indian policy. It demonstrates how tribes have used lobbying as a way to build resilience over time by influencing the development of federal Indian policies that protect tribal sovereignty. This Article emphasizes the role of American Indian voices in federal policy–making and shows how tribes have used legislative advocacy to initiate new policies, to reverse court decisions, and to oversee the implementation of existing policies. In conclusion, this Article considers some of the implications of this research for federal Indian law and interest group and advocacy studies more generally.
Bibliographic Details
Published by the Law Review Editorial Board, J. Reuben Clark Law School, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah; and hosted by the BYU Law Digital Library at https://digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/elj/.
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know