Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
No change in size ,  00:54, November 15, 2008
m
no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:  
In '''''Duro v. Reina''''', 495 U.S. 676, 685, 688 (1990), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that, except as provided by [[Congress]], tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians.  In other words, an Indian tribe cannot prosecute Indians who are not members of that tribe, except as authorized by [[Congress]].
 
In '''''Duro v. Reina''''', 495 U.S. 676, 685, 688 (1990), the [[U.S. Supreme Court]] held that, except as provided by [[Congress]], tribes lack criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians.  In other words, an Indian tribe cannot prosecute Indians who are not members of that tribe, except as authorized by [[Congress]].
   −
In response to this ruling, congress amended the Indian Self Governance section of the Indian Civil Rights Act to state that Indians have the right to prosecute anyone who commits a crime on that tribe's territory, regardless of Tribal Affiliation.
+
In response to this ruling, Congress amended the Indian Self Governance section of the Indian Civil Rights Act to state that Indians have the right to prosecute anyone who commits a crime on that tribe's territory, regardless of Tribal Affiliation.
    
==References==
 
==References==
60

edits

Navigation menu