Abstract
The Alaska Supreme Court recently overhauled its approach to arm-of-the-tribe sovereign immunity in Ito v. Copper River Native Association. The Court no longer utilizes financial insularity as a dispositive inquiry; instead, the Court has adopted a five-factor test that takes into account (1) the purpose of the entity’s creation, (2) the method of the entity's creation, (3) the degree of control the tribe maintains over the entity, (4) tribal intent concerning sharing sovereign immunity, and (5) financial relationship. This decision serves as a positive development for two reasons: (1) it is a step towards the elimination of a dual-track justice system and (2) it lessens the undesirable degree of variability in the extension of sovereign immunity to quasi-public entities created by Native tribes and other sovereigns. Alaskan citizens will now be better situated to receive equitable court access regardless of their claim’s jurisdiction and regardless of the sovereign from which the potential immunity extends.
Citation
Jack Jeffrey & Erik Gordon,
Alaska's Arm-of-the-Tribe Jurisprudence: Ito v.
Copper River Native Association and Its
Contribution to a More Uniform System of Justice in
America,
41 Alaska Law Review
267-277
(2024)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/alr/vol41/iss1/10