PL-280 in Alaska Tribal Management Program Kevin M Illingworth J.D. University of Alaska Fairbanks College of Rural and Community Development 907-474-5710.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Concept of Law and Sources of Law
Advertisements

An exercise that can strengthen Tribal Sovereignty.
INDIAN LAW Indian tribes are “distinct, independent political communities, retaining their original natural rights” in matters of local self-government.
Federalism 4.1 The Division of Power.
Understanding Our Communities
NAGRA 2006 Texas Hold’em Poker in North America.
Tribal Governments of Nebraska. What does it mean to be Sovereign? Supreme authority over A politically independent state.
Land into Federal Trust For Alaska Tribes Tribal Transportation Conference September 2014 Prepared by Lisa Jaeger Tribal Government Specialist Tanana Chiefs.
Environmental Justice in Indian Country Joseph Myers Executive Director National Indian Justice Center 5250 Aero Drive Santa Rosa, CA P: (707)
Association on American Indian Affairs The Federal Trust Relationship, Tribal Sovereignty, and Self-Determination Prepared by Jack F. Trope, Executive.
Tribal Sovereign Immunity Tribal Transportation Conference September 2014 Prepared by Lisa Jaeger Tribal Government Specialist Tanana Chiefs Conference.
Native Americans and the Denial of Treaty Rights Political Science 61 / Chicano/Latino Studies 64 October 16, 2007.
Murder is murder and somebody must answer Private John G. Burnett
The History of Sovereign Nations in dealings with the United States American Indian Policy.
Session Objectives Provide a basic overview of key principles of federal Indian law (with focus on jurisdictional issues) Discuss application of legal.
P.L. 280 and Alaska Tribes Tribal Transportation Conference September 2014 Prepared by Lisa Jaeger Tribal Government Specialist Tanana Chiefs Conference.
Sarah Deer Associate Professor William Mitchell College of Law.
Environmental Review: NEPA, TEPA and Tribes. NEPA – good and bad for Tribes Tribes can use as tool to slow, examine, participate in process and urge changes.
Tribal Courts in Wisconsin for the Practitioner New to Tribal Courts Dane County Bar Association April 22, 2008 Attorney Paul Stenzel Stenzel Law Office,
Indian Child Welfare Act 1978 Training. Native American Statistics – USA 4.1 million people reported as American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) 2000 US.
& The Questions It Raises Over Taxation On Indian Reservations By: Jennifer C. Klein, Deputy County Counsel Sonoma County Counsel’s Office May 30, 2013.
- Felix Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law (1941)
Applying Jurisdictional Statutes in Interstate Custody Cases to Protect Survivors and Their Children Deborah Goelman Darren Mitchell Christine Pate.
American Indian Political Activism Political Activism in the 60s and 70s Treaty Rights in Wisconsin Indian Gaming (Casinos, etc.)
The National Indian Gaming Commission From Legal Bingo to Illegal Class II / III Casinos by Misusing the IGRA.
Developing and Implementing Solid Waste Codes ITEP - TSWEAP Wyndham San Diego Bayside, San Diego, CA February 24-26, 2015 Gussie A. Lord Jill Grant & Associates,
Gallagher Law Library, Oct Indian Law Research Guide: Indian Law Research Indian Law ResearchIndian Law Research.
Gaming and Gambling (L32) Dr. Anton Treuer Bemidji State University.
 The Canadian legal system has its foundation in the British common law system  Quebec, however, still retains a civil system for issues of private.
The Federal Court System
Inyo County VS. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community By Katie Davidson.
Session Objectives Provide a basic overview of key principles of federal Indian policy and federal government relationship with tribes Provide a basic.
Developing and Implementing Solid Waste Codes ITEP - TSWEAP Wyndham San Diego Bayside, San Diego, CA September 23-25, 2014 Gussie A. Lord Jill Grant &
What is the purpose of the Class I Redesignation Guidance? Provides guidance for tribes who are considering redesignating their areas as Class I areas.
1. Department of Finance Revenue and Taxation Division 2 Exempt Status of Natives / First Nations.
Naiomi Metallic Different theories of First Nations governance Naiomi Metallic CESD 3216 – CESD and the Law January 25-26, 2010 Part 3.
Topic 1: The Australian legal system 1.Basic concepts 2.Classifying law 3.Origins of Australian law 4.The federal system 5.The separation of powers.
KCSE Annual Conference Tribal and State Jurisdiction in Enforcement and Establishment Presented by Marsha L. Harlan.
Article III The Judicial Power. Section 1 The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as.
Chapter 5.  It creates the three branches of government  Executive  Legislative  Judicial  It allocates powers to these branches  It protects individual.
The Brussels II Regulation The Council Regulation no 2201/2003 concerning the jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgment in matrimonial.
AMENDMENTS Amendments 11 – 27 were added from 1795 to 1992
Chapter 4: Federalism.
Federalism Central issue: Where is the sovereignty?
Federalism. Federalism System of govt. in which a written constitution divides the powers of govt. between a national government and several regional.
42 U.S.C. Section 7418(a), of the federal Clean Air Act “Each department, agency, and instrumentality of the executive, legislative, and judicial branches.
TAS and TIP Swinomish Tribe and the Incremental Approach.
Federal Law Principles of Tribal Sovereignty Tribes are separate sovereign governments Tribal sovereignty generally extends over tribal territory Tribal.
Federalism. Federalism is a system of government in which a written constitution divides the powers of government on a territorial basis between a central,
PRESENTATION REGARDING CALIFORNIA TRIBES AND LYTTON RANCHERIA FEE-TO-TRUST FOR TOWN OF WINDSOR by Nancy Thorington August 25, 2015.
CHAPTER 4: FEDERALISM Section 1: Federalism: The Division of Power.
Kenneth S. Komoroski Natural Resource Damages: Claimants, Damages & Liability Protection.
Perryville V. Tague.
Seven Fascinating Court Decisions Affecting Indians and Tribes
Untangling the Web: Understanding Criminal Jurisdiction in Indian Country & the Role of Tribal Sovereignty.
Government-to-government Relationship with tribes
The tribal law enforcement consortium of arizona
Wisconsin Judicial College: Indian Law – A Very Brief Primer
History, Jurisdiction, & Functions of Contemporary Tribal Courts
Indian Country Lunch and Learn
Federalism.
Council for Tribal Employment Rights
The United States Court System
Jurisdictional Relationships
Magruder’s American Government
Federalism defined - A system of government in which a written constitution divides the powers of government between a central (national) government and.
Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Government
Section 4 Tribal Courts.
Class 05 American Indian Law Today
Tribal Jurisdiction in Alaska
Presentation transcript:

PL-280 in Alaska Tribal Management Program Kevin M Illingworth J.D. University of Alaska Fairbanks College of Rural and Community Development

What is P.L. 280? Public Law 280 is a ‘Termination Era’ law aimed at transferring jurisdiction from the federal government to the states. Alaska, California, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska and Oregon are mandatory PL 280 States. Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Montana and Washington are optional PL 280 states.

Pu blic Law State Jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians in the Indian country (a)Each of the States or Territories listed in the following table shall have jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians in the areas of Indian country listed opposite the name of the State or Territory to the same extent that such State or Territory has jurisdiction over offenses committed elsewhere within the State or Territory, and the criminal laws of such State or Territory shall have the same force and effect within such Indian country as they have elsewhere within the State or Territory. Alaska: All Indian country within the State, except that on Annette Islands, the Metlakatla Indian community may exercise jurisdiction over offenses committed by Indians in the same manner in which such jurisdiction may be exercised by Indian tribes in Indian country over which State jurisdiction has not been extended.

State civil jurisdiction in actions to which Indians are parties (a)Each of the States listed in the following table shall have jurisdiction over civil causes of action between Indians or to which Indians are parties which arise in the areas of Indian country listed opposite the name of the State to the same extent that such State has jurisdiction over other civil causes of action, and those civil laws of such State that are of general application to private persons or private property shall have the same force and effect within such Indian country as they have elsewhere within the State. Alaska: All Indian country within the State.

What is P.L. 280? Public Law 280 is a transfer to the State of: 1.criminal jurisdiction and 1.jurisdiction over civil causes of action (lawsuits) 1.…within Indian Country -Outside of Indian Country, the State of Alaska already has criminal jurisdiction, jurisdiction over civil causes of action, as well as regulatory jurisdiction.

What Impact Does P.L. 280 Have in Alaska Today? P.L. 280 has no significant legal impact in Alaska. But P.L. 280 has had a significant effect on Alaska tribes because Alaska Natives have been falsely led to believe that P.L. 280 was an obstacle to tribal jurisdiction. P.L. 280 is a grant of concurrent jurisdiction to the State, it does not terminate any jurisdiction or powers that tribes have.

Tribal Jurisdiction: P.L. 280 “By its very text, P.L. 280 applies only in Indian Country” -Alaska Supreme Court in John v. Baker “We conclude that ICWA section 1911(b) authorizes the transfer of jurisdiction to tribal courts regardless of P.L Alaska Supreme Court in C.R.H “The State cannot simultaneously assert that…there is no Indian Country and that PL 280 prevails.” Indian Law and Order Commission

Tribal Jurisdiction: P.L. 280 Despite PL 280, Tribes in Alaska retain concurrent criminal and civil jurisdiction over tribal members. “Do Alaska Native villages have inherent, non-territorial sovereignty allowing them to resolve domestic disputes between their own members?… we hold that Alaska Native tribes, by virtue of their inherent powers as sovereign nations, do possess that authority. … “But the powers of self-government, including the power to prescribe and enforce internal criminal laws… are not such powers as would necessarily be lost by virtue of a tribe's dependent status.” -Alaska Supreme Court in John v. Baker

What About Land Taken Into Trust? However, PL 280 did not transfer Regulatory Jurisdiction.  Tribes (not states) have regulatory jurisdiction within Indian Country. Land taken into Trust would be Indian Country and the Tribes would have jurisdiction over both tribal members and the land.  Through P.L. 280, the State of Alaska was delegated concurrent (shared) jurisdiction over criminal laws and civil causes of action within Indian Country. Tribes would also have clear concurrent jurisdiction over criminal cases and civil causes of action.

Why is Jurisdiction over Land Important A Government has broader jurisdiction (more legal authority) with Territorial Jurisdiction. Some jurisdiction is tied to control of the land: –Clear criminal jurisdiction and the ability to exclude people who enter the land. –Ability to raise revenue (taxation) –Civil regulatory jurisdiction: Environmental regulations (clean air/water) Gaming (casinos) Zoning, Development Hunting and fishing regulation

Chin'an Thank You