The oral argument in Dollar General v. Choctaw Indians opened on an inauspicious note. The lawyer for Dollar General summarized and challenged the Choctaw argument that "when the Tribes entered the United States and were incorporated into this country, [civil jurisdiction] was understood to be an element of their sovereignty." The Dollar General lawyer denied the Choctaw position: "That is not correct." Moments later, responding to a question from Justice Ginsburg, the lawyer said, "Everyone agrees that the Tribes have a form of [civil jurisdiction] upon consent. They don't have it inherently."
One expects the opposing party to deny one's arguments. No surprise. The inauspicious note stems from the part of the Choctaw argument Dollar General didn't deny: namely, the notion that "the Tribes entered the United States and were incorporated into [the] country." Dollar General didn't deny that part of the Choctaw argument because it agrees with it.