Talk:Boldt Decision

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, which collaborates on Native American, First Nations, Inuit, Métis and related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet been rated on the assessment scale.

Please rate this article and leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

[edit] Held for 30 Years?

The case has significant negative citation history - while it may still be narrow law (and I am not sure of even that), I think it might be deceptive to say that it has held for 30 years. Is anyone more familiar with this case in a position to set me straight here? Editor Emeritus 16:19, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

      • It is accurate to say that this case has held. It is a case of continuing jurisdiction with multiple subproceedings being filed annually to fine tune it or interpret the many areas where the original decision was not able to provide guidance. Today, the orginal decision has been extended to shellfish harvest and its principals have been applied to off-reservation treaty hunting as well. It is alive and well. [Prof. Ron Whitener, Univ. of Washington Law School]