North Dakota Law Review, vol. 82, no. 3, The Pedagogy of American Indian Law, 2006, pp. 627-695
Description
Re-examines the three decisions that make up the bases for Indian common law known as the "Marshall Trilogy": Johnson v M'Intosh, Cherokee Nations v. Georgia, and Worcester v. Georgia.
Argues that while, on the surface Canada may seem to have respected the right to self-government, in practical terms it has done little and a landmark decision is needed to speed the process.