Law | National

Bishop Paiute Tribe sues county for interfering with sovereignty

Wednesday, March 11, 2015

Officer Daniel Johnson. Photo from Bishop Paiute Tribe Newsletter

History is repeating itself as the Bishop Paiute Tribe goes back to federal court in a sovereignty dispute with Inyo County in California.

The county is prosecuting tribal officer Daniel Johnson for an incident that occurred on the reservation late last year. On January 5, he was charged with assault with a stun gun, false imprisonment, falsely representing himself to be a public officer and battery.

The next day, the county issued a "cease and desist order" to the tribe, warning that other officers face arrest if they carry firearms outside the reservation. That means they could be prosecuted for merely driving to work on local highways.

"Defendants’ threat of future arrests and charging of the tribe’s officers for carrying out their lawful and duly authorized power, is a direct, and immediate interference, with the tribe’s sovereign authority to provide public safety on its reservation," the tribe writes in the complaint.

The incident in question occurred on Christmas Eve. Johnson responded to a call from a tribal member who was seeking protection from a non-Indian who is the subject of domestic violence orders in tribal court and state court.

The lawsuit identifies the non-Indian as the ex-wife of the tribal member. According to the complaint, she refused to leave the residence and engaged in a scuffle with Johnson before she was tasered.

The incident was apparently witnessed by a county sheriff's deputy who was also on the scene. Other law enforcement arrived after the tasering, according to the complaint.

"At this time the criminal case against Officer Johnson is moving forward and he is on desk duty unable to perform his regular duties until the criminal case against him has been resolved," the lawsuit states.

With only four officers on the force, the sidelining of Johnson, who has more than 25 years of experience, has a big impact on the tribe. In the last two years alone, officers responded to 469 calls and issued 340 reports, a large number for a reservation with less than 1,800 residents.

Tribal officers do not exercise criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians, the complaint states. But tribal law allows them to enforce protection orders.

Additionally, Section 905 of the Violence Against Women Act of 2013 recognizes the authority of tribes to issue and enforce protection orders involving "any person" regardless of race or tribal status. This provision in S.47 is separate from the one that recognizes tribal jurisdiction over non-Indian domestic violence offenders.

The dispute isn't the first high-profile clash between the tribe and the county. In a case that went all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, county officials went to the tribe's casino and used bolt cutters to take tribal records without the tribe's permission.

The case was closely watched throughout Indian Country out of fear the justices would erode tribal rights. The court eventually ruled that the tribe could not sue the county for infringing on its sovereignty.

Get the Story:
Tension Between Tribe and California Sheriff (Courthouse News Service 3/11)

Supreme Court Decision in Inyo County v. Bishop Paiute Tribe:
Syllabus | Opinion [Ginsburg] | Concurrence [Stevens]