Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians

746 F. 3d 167, affirmed by an equallyl divided Court. . . .

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

Items with "Documents: Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians"
Title	Description	Class
U.S. Constitutionalism and Native American Sovereignty		This teaching module discusses the centrality of Native people and their nations throughout American history, featuring a webinar with Ned Blackhawk, author of the 2023 book, The Rediscovery of America: Native Peoples and the Unmaking of U.S. History.

Title: Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
Description: After an anonymous boy was sexually assaulted by the manager of the Dollar General on Choctaw land, the boy sued the manager and Dollar General in Tribal Court, using the precedent set in Montana v. United States that tribal courts could regulate the activity of non-tribal members who enter into a consensual relationship with the tribe. The Supreme Court was equally divided, so the ruling of the Court of Appeals was held: the tribal court could exercise jurisdiction over Dollar General.
Date: 2016-06-23
Author: United States. Supreme Court
Legal Concept: Federal Indian Policy; Tribal Sovereignty
Subject: Native Americans
Temporal Coverage: Contemporary America; Modern Civil Rights Movement
Spatial Coverage: Mississippi; South
Procedural History: U.S. Supreme Court; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; Choctaw Supreme Court; Choctaw Tribal Court
Document Type: Supreme Court Case
Document Category: Primary Source
Bluebook Citation: Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, 579 U.S. 545 (2016)
Digital Repository: SupremeCourt.gov
URL: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/579BV.pdf

Title: Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians
Description: After an anonymous boy was sexually assaulted by the manager of the Dollar General on Choctaw land, the boy sued the manager and Dollar General in Tribal Court, using the precedent set in Montana v. United States that tribal courts could regulate the activity of non-tribal members who enter into a consensual relationship with the tribe. The Supreme Court was equally divided, so the ruling of the Court of Appeals was held: the tribal court could exercise jurisdiction over Dollar General.
Date: 2016-06-23
Author: United States. Supreme Court
Legal Concept: Federal Indian Policy; Tribal Sovereignty
Subject: Native Americans
Temporal Coverage: Contemporary America; Modern Civil Rights Movement
Spatial Coverage: Mississippi; South
Procedural History: U.S. Supreme Court; U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit; Choctaw Supreme Court; Choctaw Tribal Court
Document Type: Supreme Court Case
Document Category: Primary Source
Bluebook Citation: Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, 579 U.S. 545 (2016)
Digital Repository: SupremeCourt.gov
URL: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/boundvolumes/579BV.pdf

Metadata