In this complex world, it is dangerous to make superficial judgments, especially if one is in a position to influence the outcome (e.g., legislator, public interest group). One must understand the full complexity of the issues and positions before taking sides. But these issues are important, and can be locally extremely important. This debate, then, should help you develop both the critical judgment and the ability to research issues, so that if a similar conflict appear in your neighborhood (or school or church), you will be able to intelligently address it.

The assignment:

You will be assigned to be a member of either the pro-Makah whaling or the anti-Makah whalint team. The team will have the following roles:

1. Develop legal arguments for or against Makah whaling. How does the law treat issues that involve the exemption of Indians from other laws? You can reach beyond whaling to use of other resources (salmon, wild rice, etc. ) and other economic activities (gambling, payment of sales taxes on reservations, etc.).
   
   
2. Develop arguments for the general public, which may go beyond purely legal arguments, taking up broader ethnical and political issues. This will require study of the claims regarding Indian identity, responsibility of the U.S. government for alleged past injustices, and so forth.
   

You will find large amounts of information using basic library research tools. Make full use of the Undergraduate Library staff, use ProQuest and other scholarly search engines. The Law Library has legal journals that will help develop legal arguments, as well, and the law librarians will help you research the issue. The web sites associated with the Inupiat and the Makah readings also have some good information (see the reading assignments).

Procedures:

First section period: Meet with your team.

1. Exchange names, email addresses, and phone numbers.
   
   
2. Define the key legal, economic, and cultural issues.
   
   
3. Divide up responsibilities for researching these issues. Everyone should write down exactly who is responsible for what. You will evaluate your teammates and yourself on how responsibly you/they fulfilled the assigned tasks.
   
   

• If possible, work with teammates in the library. Compile as complete a list as possible of sources (print out titles, sources, and abstracts of relevant articles). Survey these to determine which ones look the most helpful.
  

Second section period: Pool all the materials you have. Rough out the key arguments as you have learned them. Each member of the team should take one argument and research it more fully.

Third section period: The two teams will argue their side of the case. First each team will lay out their arguments for or against the manslaughter charges. Then each team will rebut their opponent's arguments.

Essay:

1. Write up the arguments that support your side of the case.
   
   
2. Analyze the specifically economic and the specifically cultural dimensions of the case.
   
   
3. Use examples, as relevant, from all of the materials in this section, and any other sources you have drawn on to develop your arguments.
   
   
4. Turn in all your research materials and notes, with your essay.
   
   
5. Fill out the participation forms provided, in which you assess your teammate's participation.
   

© Jane Adams 2002