Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe
Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe is a significant Supreme Court case from 1978 that addressed the issue of tribal jurisdiction over non-Indians on reservations. The case arose when two non-Indian individuals, Mark Oliphant and Dan Belgarde, were arrested for violating tribal laws during a celebration at the Port Madison Reservation in Washington. They challenged the Suquamish Tribe's authority to prosecute them, leading to a Supreme Court ruling that stated tribes do not possess criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians, even if they reside on the reservation. This decision was seen as a substantial limitation on tribal sovereignty and raised concerns about law enforcement and order on reservations, as tribes were effectively stripped of the ability to enforce their laws against a significant population within their borders. In response to the ruling, some tribes have sought alternative measures such as partnerships with local law enforcement. The legal landscape for tribal authority has seen some developments since then, particularly with the enactment of the Tribal Law and Order Act in 2010 and the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act in 2013, which aimed to strengthen tribal jurisdiction in specific cases. The implications of the Oliphant decision continue to resonate in discussions about the balance of power between tribal sovereignty and federal law.
Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe
On March 6, 1978, the United States Supreme Court in the case of Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe decided that tribes do not have jurisdiction over non-Indians who commit crimes on reservations. In 1978, during a tribal celebration, two non-Indian residents of the Port Madison Reservation of the Suquamish Tribe in Washington violated tribal laws. Mark Oliphant was arrested for assaulting tribal police officers and resisting arrest, and Dan Belgarde was arrested for hitting a tribal police car in a high-speed chase. The two argued the Suquamish tribe had no criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians, and they took their case to federal court.
The Supreme Court agreed with them and determined that non-Indians, even those residing on a reservation and charged with a crime, are not subject to the jurisdiction of tribal courts. This ruling dealt a major blow to tribal sovereignty and the authority of tribal courts because it determined that tribes lack the power to enforce laws against all who come within its borders. This ruling created serious and important law-and-order problems on reservations. Some tribes have approached the problem by cross-deputization with local and county police or by arranging for non-Indians on the reservation to submit voluntarily to tribal authority. Tribal authority was somewhat expanded with the 2010 Tribal Law and Order Act as well as the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, with the latter specifically providing tribal jurisdiction over non-Indian men accused of assault against Indian women.
Bibliography
Champagne, Duane. "Oliphant Decision Led to Jurisdictional Issues on Indian Reservations." Indian Country Today Media Network.com. Indian Country Today Media Network, 7 Jan. 2012. Web. 28 Apr. 2015.
Fixico, Donald Lee. Treaties with American Indians: An Encyclopedia of Rights, Conflicts, and Sovereignty. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 2008. Print.
Fletcher, Matthew L. M. "DOJ Takes Step Toward Addressing Violent Crime Against American Indian Women." American Constitution Society for Law and Policy. ACS, 4 Aug. 2011. Web. 28 Apr. 2015.
Knowles, F. E., Jr. The Indian Law Legacy of Thurgood Marshall. Basingstoke: Palgrave: 2014. Print.
"Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe." Oyez. Oyez, IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law, 2014. Web. 28 Apr. 2015.