CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

United States v. Bryant

United States Supreme Court case

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionApr 27, 2026
Entity authorityQ19027859 ↗
Source-derived summary

United States v. Bryant, 579 U.S. 140 (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that tribal-court convictions from proceedings that complied with Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 may be used as predicate offenses in subsequent prosecution.

References

External links

Text of United States v. Bryant, No. 15-420, 579 U.S. ___ (2016) is available from: Internet Archive (docket files) Justia

This article incorporates written opinion of a United States federal court. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the text is in the public domain.

Editorial summary

“United States v. Bryant” enters the record as united States Supreme Court case. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what United, States and Bryant can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2016, 1968—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around United, States and Bryant.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“United States v. Bryant” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, United, States and Bryant provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 27, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q19027859. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2016 and 1968.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “United States v. Bryant”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow United States v. Bryant primary sources, United States v. Bryant archive and United research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “United States v. Bryant”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “United States v. Bryant” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.