holding that the special status of Native Americans under federal law created a "permissible class" for purposes of state equal protection allowing Washington to protect treaty-guaranteed Native American access to fisheries in Washington after Supreme Court indicated in Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, 443 U.S. 658, 695-96, 99 S.Ct. 3055, 61 LEd.2d 823 (1979), that Supremacy Clause would grant federal courts power to enforce those rights directly
How later courts described this case
- holding that the special status of Native Americans under federal law created a "permissible class" for purposes of state equal protection allowing Washington to protect treaty-guaranteed Native American access to fisheries in Washington after Supreme Court indicated in Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, 443 U.S. 658, 695-96, 99 S.Ct. 3055, 61 LEd.2d 823 (1979), that Supremacy Clause would grant federal courts power to enforce those rights directly
- overruling past Washington Supreme Court decisions which had precluded Washington agencies’ attempts at compliance with the decree, and recognizing that the agencies have the authority to manage the fishery in a manner that gives full force and effect to the treaty rights of the Indians
- stating that “nontreaty fishermen do not have a ‘vested’ or ‘natural’ property right to fish” and signatory tribes have a treaty right “that nontreaty fishermen do not enjoy.”
- modifying precedent to conform with United States Supreme Court’s ruling in case where it resolved a disagreement between the Washington Supreme Court and a lower federal court in favor of the lower federal court
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Rosellini, J.
(concurring) — I concur in the result of Justice Horowitz' opinion. I do this not because I believe that the interpretation of the Indian treaties by the United States Supreme Court is correct, but because I am compelled to do so by the supremacy clause of the United *956 States Constitution. If I were not bound by the supremacy clause, I would adopt Justice Powell's dissent in Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Ass'n, 443 U.S. 658 , 61 L. Ed. 2d 823 , 99 S. Ct. 3055 (1979).
Brachtenbach and Hicks, JJ., concur with Rosellini, J.
Reconsideration denied April 2, 1980,.