Yankton Sioux Tribe of Indians v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

39 federal appellate · 6 district · 4 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 101 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “impossible to ... restore the Indians to their former rights.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. City of Sherrill New York v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York et al. · United States v. State of Wash.

2. “to establish what interest, title, ownership, or right of possession the tribe may have possessed to a certain tract of land. Id. The case eventually went to the Supreme Court, which concluded that the Yankton Sioux Tribe did possess title to the land and ordered just compensation for the land as a taking under the power of eminent domain. The Navajo Tribe court found the relief granted by the Supreme Court in Yankton highly relevant to the case before it: It is significant that the Court ordered monetary compensation”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Little Traverse Bay Bands Indians v. Whitmer · Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina v. State of South Carolina

3. “to hear, and report a finding of fact, as between the United States and the Yankton tribe of Indians of South Dakota as to the interest, title, ownership and right of possession of said tribe”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Little Traverse Bay Bands Indians v. Whitmer · Navajo Tribe of Indians v. New Mexico