the deeds to the property the United States purchased for the tribe specifically mention the appurtenant water rights and/or the Humboldt Decree. We conclude that the purchase of the reservation land subject to previously adjudicated water rights constituted an express waiver of sovereign immunity, and that the tribe’s actions in benefiting from and abiding by the Humboldt Decree for more than five decades served to ratify this waiver. See State Engineer v. South Fork Band of Te-Moak Tribe, 66 F. Supp. 2d at 1163, 1172 (D. Nev. 1999) (stating that “[i]f there remain[s] any doubt as to the United States [’] express and unequivocal waiver in behalf of the Tribe, in its initial purchase of the decreed rights, the Tribe’s actions over the ensuing fifty years since the p P.2d 1147 (1985) (<HOLDING>). However, here, as the purchase of the tribe’s
holding that the arrest of an indian on indian land was illegal because the state had no jurisdiction over the reservation to enforce its laws  including the execution of a search warrant  unless congress consented to the states jurisdiction holding that state has no jurisdiction over civil suit by nonindian against indian where cause of action arises on indian reservation holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction to entertain a civil action filed by a nonindian against an indian for events that occurred on indian land holding that a nevada state court had no jurisdiction over indian claims to land allotments holding that the state did not have jurisdiction over crime committed on land held by the bureau of indian affairs for the use and benefit of a discrete indian community