intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:capital-fit | capital-fit | P2 | Establish funding and implementation fit for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Capital pathways: Public investment, housing, schools, health, community wealth, data infrastructure, legal remedy, monitoring and institutional redesign. Record instrument, payer, intermediary, recipient, restriction, duration, risk allocation, beneficiary reach and observed outcome separately. | Query the funding and award sources in the issue packet; distinguish appropriations, obligations, outlays, grants, contracts, loans, guarantees, tax expenditures and private capital. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:definition-authority | definition-authority | P1 | Add authoritative definitions and scope boundaries for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | research scope: Assess how institutional rules, discretion, data, spatial structures, resource allocation and cross-system compounding create or transmit racialized outcomes without assuming disparity proves discrimination. For Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures, treat the unit of analysis as a source-defined law, rule, institution, service, market, exposure, process or observed outcome. Do not infer a claim from category membership, identity, geography or association alone. Starting authorities: Race and Ethnicity Data, Statistical Policy Directive No. 15: Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity, Race/Color Discrimination. | Extract the operative definition, jurisdiction, exclusions, legal/status hierarchy and date from the cited sources; store exact locators. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:implementation | implementation | P2 | Document supported implementation pathways for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Implementation approach: Specify rule or mechanism, decisionmaker, population, exposure, comparator, outcome, timing and counterfactual; separate intent, impact, association and causation. Operationally, create an issue-specific logic chain from authority and need through implementer, action, output, outcome, remedy and feedback. | Populate responsible authority, implementer, delivery channel, eligibility, process step, service standard, output, outcome, cost and failure mode. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:measures-trends | measures-trends | P1 | Assign dated measures or a comparable time series for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Measurement framework: population scale and exposure; access, participation or utilization; institutional capacity and resources; process, complaint or enforcement outcome; substantive outcome or wellbeing; gap by subgroup, geography and time. Denominator: Source-defined eligible, affected, exposed or served population; raw counts must be paired with denominators. Cadence: At least three comparable periods where available, with methodology changes flagged. | Extract a baseline, latest value and comparable time series for each feasible indicator; retain numerator, denominator, geography, subgroup, methodology and vintage. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:relationships | relationships | P2 | Add explicit supported relationship records for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures where evidence warrants them. | Candidate research relationships: Indigenous Sovereignty & Public Systems (0.40; indigenou, indigenous, sovereignty); Algorithmic Discrimination & Surveillance (0.28; shared institutional/source pathway); Institutional Rule Design & Disparate Implementation (0.28; shared institutional/source pathway). These are routing hypotheses based on title/source proximity, not research intersectionality or causal findings. | For each candidate pair, test a named shared mechanism, direction, comparator, counterfactual, distinctiveness and independent source support. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:risks-safeguards | risks-safeguards | P2 | Document issue-specific risks, failure conditions, and safeguards for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Material risks: Causal overclaim, aggregation, proxy discrimination, feedback loops, historical determinism, surveillance, undermeasurement and remedy retaliation. Required safeguards: Mechanism-specific hypotheses, subgroup data, robust comparators, counterevidence, independent audit, privacy, accessible remedy and historical/current distinction. | Create one risk-control record per material risk with trigger, affected population, preventive control, detective control, remedy, owner and monitoring indicator. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:rulings-confirmatory | rulings-confirmatory | P1 | Acquire confirmatory rulings for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. 894 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2020). Held that Congress had not disestablished the Muscogee (Creek) Reservation for federal criminal-jurisdiction purposes. McGirt v. Oklahoma supports or supplies a protective rule relevant to Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. Fit tier: Direct. The placement must be used only within the holding and limitations recorded here. | Verify official text, current precedential status, later treatment, pinpoint holding, jurisdiction and exact issue-claim linkage; add lower-court or agency authorities where needed. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:rulings-disconfirmatory | rulings-disconfirmatory | P1 | Acquire disconfirmatory, limiting, adverse, or narrowing rulings for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, 597 U.S. 629 (U.S. Supreme Court, 2022). Held that the Federal Government and the State have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indians against Indians in Indian country unless preempted. Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta rejects, narrows, limits, or supplies adverse authority relevant to Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. Fit tier: Direct. The placement must be used only within the holding and limitations recorded here. | Verify official text, current precedential status, later treatment, pinpoint holding, jurisdiction and exact issue-claim linkage; add lower-court or agency authorities where needed. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:sources-policy-rulings | sources-policy-rulings | P1 | Acquire sources, datasets, policy records, and rulings for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | A 12-source issue packet has been assembled from the Source Registry. Confirmatory candidate: McGirt v. Oklahoma (Direct); disconfirmatory/limiting candidate: Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta (Direct). Policy, data, implementation and adjudicatory sources remain separately typed. | Extract exact locators and claim linkages; perform legal currentness review; add jurisdiction-specific lower-court and agency material where the registry records a gap or analogue. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:stakeholder-authority | stakeholder-authority | P2 | Identify documented affected groups, institutional actors, and decision authority for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Stakeholder set: Racial and ethnic communities across subgroup, class, disability, gender, geography and migration; agencies, employers, schools, health and housing systems, technology firms and courts. Separate affected people, rights holders, duty bearers, funders, implementers, data holders, adjudicators, advocates and potential opposing interests. | Validate each stakeholder class from a cited source; record authority, interest, exposure, decision rights, accountability and conflict-of-interest. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:systems-differences | systems-differences | P2 | Source the systems and distributional differences material to Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Systems map: Administrative rules and discretion; budgets and public investment; housing and geography; education, health and labor; algorithms and surveillance; data standards; remedy and retaliation. Compare legal regime, eligibility, administrative process, funding, delivery channel, data definition, geography and population before making cross-system claims. | Build a comparison matrix across jurisdictions and subgroups; record which dimensions are comparable, non-comparable or missing. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:tensions | tensions | P2 | Document issue-specific tensions or contrary evidence for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Material tensions: Race-conscious remedy versus classification limits; universalism versus targeted repair; measurement detail versus privacy; discretion versus standardized administration.. Limiting authority candidate: Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta (Direct). | Record each tension as competing claim A/claim B, affected stakeholders, legal/policy authority, empirical trade-off, boundary conditions and assessment or decision rule. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|
intake:indigenous-sovereignty-settler-colonial-structures:values-responsibilities | values-responsibilities | P2 | Document issue-specific values and institutional responsibilities for Indigenous Sovereignty & Settler-Colonial Structures. | Values and responsibilities: Equal protection, fair administration, accurate measurement, opportunity, non-domination, accountability and effective remedy. Translate these into explicit duties for government, institutions, funders, implementers, data stewards and affected-community governance. | Link each asserted value to a legal, policy or ethical authority and to a measurable institutional responsibility, safeguard and remedy. | Published · owner-authorized |
|---|