In the case of Washington et al. v. Confederated Bands and Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation, 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Washington State's Public Law 280 which gave certain states jurisdiction over criminal offenses committed by or against Native Americans on reservations. The Yakima Nation argued that this law infringed upon their tribal sovereignty but the court disagreed stating that Congress had plenary power over Indian affairs and could thus delegate authority to state governments without infringing upon tribal self-government. Furthermore, it was held that while tribes retained some elements of inherent sovereignty even after being incorporated into U.S., they did not possess foreign nation status; hence federal government can limit their autonomy.

In the dissenting opinion for Washington et al. v. Confederated Bands and Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation, Justice William Rehnquist argued that Public Law 280 was intended to grant states jurisdiction over civil causes of action involving Indians on reservations without requiring tribal consent. He disagreed with the majority's interpretation that this law only allowed states to assume jurisdiction in areas where they had not previously been barred by federal statute or treaty provisions, arguing instead that it should be read as a broad grant of authority to state governments. Furthermore, he contended that Congress did not intend for tribes to have veto power over state assumption of jurisdiction under Public Law 280 because such an interpretation would render meaningless its provision allowing unilateral state withdrawal from assumed jurisdictions.