(a) It is hereby declared the policy of the state of Connecticut to recognize that all resident Indians of qualified Connecticut tribes are considered to be full citizens of the state and they are hereby granted all the rights and privileges afforded by law, that all of Connecticut's citizens enjoy. It is further recognized that said Indians have certain special rights to tribal lands as may have been set forth by treaty or other agreements.
(b) The state of Connecticut further recognizes that the indigenous tribes, the Schaghticoke, the Paucatuck Eastern Pequot, the Mashantucket Pequot, the Mohegan and the Golden Hill Paugussett are self-governing entities possessing powers and duties over tribal members and reservations. Such powers and duties include the power to: (1) Determine tribal membership and residency on reservation land; (2) determine the tribal form of government; (3) regulate trade and commerce on the reservation; (4) make contracts; and (5) determine tribal leadership in accordance with tribal practice and usage.
(P.A. 73-660, S. 1, 11; P.A. 89-368, S. 16.)
History: P.A. 89-368 added Subsec. (b) giving recognition of powers and duties of indigenous tribes over tribal members and reservations.
Cited. 176 C. 318; 180 C. 474; 217 C. 612; 231 C. 563; 243 C. 115. Although section recognizes the right of tribes to select their own leaders, it does not provide that leadership disputes may be settled through means that violate state criminal statutes. 263 C. 602.
Cited. 18 CA 4; 22 CA 229; judgment reversed, see 217 C. 612. “Rights and privileges” include access to state's courts, and tribe's initiation of summary process action in state court constitutes consent to the court's jurisdiction. 138 CA 204.
Subsec. (a):
“Rights and privileges” must include access to the state's courts; court properly exercised subject matter jurisdiction to adjudicate summary process action involving eviction from reservation land where plaintiffs, by initiating action, consented to court's jurisdiction and the court's exercise of jurisdiction did not interfere with the Schaghticoke Indians' right to self-governance or infringe on any tribal laws or adjudicative authority of the Schaghticoke Indians. 138 CA 204.
Notes of Decisions
State v. Sebastian, 701 A.2d 13 (Conn. 1997).
· cites it 11× “General Statutes § 47-59a (b). Any action by a state court that infringed on tribal sovereignty or interfered in tribal self-government would therefore be improper.”
Hopkins v. Pac, 429 A.2d 952 (Conn. 1980).
· cites it 5× “See General Statutes §§ 47-59a through 47-66d.”
Kizis v. Morse Diesel Int'l, Inc., 794 A.2d 498 (Conn. 2002).
· cites it 2× “General Statutes § 47-59a (b) provides in relevant part: “The state of Connecticut further recognizes that the indigenous tribes .”
State v. Velky, 821 A.2d 752 (Conn. 2003).
· cites it 4× “” General Statutes § 47-59a provides in relevant part: “(b) The state of Connecticut further recognizes that the indigenous tribes, [including] the Schaghticoke .”
Paucatuck E. Pequot Indians v. Connecticut Indian Affairs Council, 555 A.2d 1003 (Conn. App. Ct. 1989).
· cites it 3× “General Statutes § 47-59a, 47-59b (a). On December 7,1982, the individual defendants and the Eastern Pequot challenged Williams’ tribal representation on the CIAC, pursuant to the regulations of the department of environmental protection, §§ 47-59b-5 and 47-59b-6 of the…”
Rolling Cloud v. Gill, 412 F. Supp. 1085 (D. Conn. 1976).
· cites it 7× “JOSEPH SMITH, Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs in the instant action seek to overturn Connecticut’s recently adopted statutory scheme for the conduct of the state’s Indian-related activities, Conn.Gen. Stat.Ann. § 47-59a et seq. (Chapter 824).”
Ellis v. Allied Snow Plowing, Removal & Sanding Servs. Corp., 838 A.2d 237 (Conn. App. Ct. 2004).
· cites it 2× “The issue in this case is whether the tribe’s sovereign immunity entitles a general contractor to claim sovereign immunity from state court jurisdiction to hear a tort claim arising out of the contractor’s alleged negligence in performing snow removal duties on tribally owned…”
Golden Hill Paugussett Tribe of Indians v. Rell, 463 F. Supp. 2d 192 (D. Conn. 2006).
“§ 47~66h(b) ("Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to confer tribal status under federal law on the indigenous tribes named in section 47-59a."). 7 . Because the Court concludes that Golden Hill cannot satisfy the tribal status component of a Nonintercourse Act claim as a…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.