Law | National

Supreme Court upholds use of tribal convictions in federal system






Connie Black Bear-Brushbreaker, a member of the Rosebud Sioux Tribe of South Dakota, performs an honor song for Native women at the U.S. Supreme Court on December 7, 2015. Also pictured is Chief Arvol Looking Horse. Photo by Indianz.Com

The U.S. Supreme Court issued another Indian law decision on Monday, confirming that tribal convictions can be used against repeat domestic violence offenders.

The ruling in US v. Bryant was unanimous. It resolves a split that had arisen in the lower courts and it ensures that Native women in all states can be protected by a federal law that was written to address high rates of violence in tribal communities.

The decision from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in fact laid out the statistics familiar in Indian Country. Native women are 2.5 times more likely to be sexually assaulted than other women and nearly half have suffered physical violence by an intimate partner, she noted, citing federal data on the issue.

"States are unable or unwilling to fill the enforcement gap," Ginsburg wrote. "Most states lack jurisdiction over crimes committed in Indian country against Indian victims."


Indianz.Com SoundCloud: U.S. Supreme Court Oral Argument in United States v. Bryant

By recognizing tribal convictions, Congress has offered some measure of justice for Native women, she continued. A provision, known as 18 U.S.C. § 117, treats offenders as "habitual" if they have two or more convictions in federal, state of tribal courts.

But a split arose when the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that the use of tribal convictions violated a defendant's right to an attorney under the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. That holding conflicted with the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals and the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, leaving Native women in a large number of states -- including California and Washington -- without the same protections as their counterparts.

The Supreme Court's decision resolves that split in favor of a view advanced by Native women, their advocates and the Obama administration. Since tribes are "separate sovereigns" that fall outside of the U.S. Constitution, their court systems are not bound by those same requirements, Ginsburg wrote for the majority.

"The Bill of Rights, including the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, therefore, does not apply in tribal-court proceedings," the decision stated.


A sign at the Northern Cheyenne Tribe's court. Photo by Northern Cheyenne Tribe

At the same time, the court noted that Congress "accorded a range of procedural safeguards to tribal-court defendants" under the Indian Civil Rights Act. Newer laws, including the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 and the Violence Against Women Act of 2013, expand on that premise by recognizing expanded tribal sentencing and jurisdiction over non-Indians, provided that tribal courts protect the rights of defendants.

"As a result of the limitations on tribal, state, and federal jurisdiction in Indian country, serial domestic violence offenders, prior to the enactment of §117(a), faced at most a year’s imprisonment per offense—a sentence insufficient to deter repeated and escalating abuse," Ginsburg wrote of the federal law at issue in the case. "To ratchet up the punishment of serial offenders, Congress created the federal felony offense of domestic assault in Indian country by a habitual offender."

But while the decision was unanimous, Justice Clarence Thomas once again took pains to separate himself from the Supreme Court's Indian law precedents. As he did last week in an unrelated case where "inherent" tribal sovereignty was discussed at length, he said the decision rests on the legal "fiction" that Congress has "plenary" authority over Indian affairs.

"Indian tribes have varied origins, discrete treaties with the United States, and different patterns of assimilation and conquest," Thomas wrote in an opinion that was labeled as a concurrence. "In light of the tribes’ distinct histories, it strains credulity to assume that all tribes necessarily retained the sovereign prerogative of prosecuting their own members. And by treating all tribes as possessing an identical quantum of sovereignty, the Court’s precedents have made it all but impossible to understand the ultimate source of each tribe’s sovereignty and whether it endures."

"Congress’ purported plenary power over Indian tribes rests on even shakier foundations. No enumerated power— not Congress’ power to 'regulate Commerce . . . with Indian Tribes,' not the Senate’s role in approving treaties, nor anything else—gives Congress such sweeping authority,' Thomas continued.

Oral arguments were heard on April 19 so the Supreme Court's decision came after 55 days. That falls in line with rulings in other Indian law cases from the current term: 55 days for Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin v. US, a contract support costs dispute, and 62 days for Nebraska v. Parker, a reservation diminishment case affecting the Omaha Tribe.

In contrast, the justices have yet to issue a decision in Dollar General Corporation v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, the oldest case on the docket. Oral arguments were heard on December 7, 2015.

Additional opinions are expected to be issued on Thursday so it's possible a ruling could come this week.

Supreme Court Decision:
US v. Bryant (June 13, 2016)

Supreme Court Documents:
Oral Argument Transcript | Docket Sheet No. 15-420: US v. Bryant | Question Presented

8th Circuit Decisions:
US v Harlan (February 16, 2016)
US v. Cavanaugh (July 6, 2011)

9th Circuit Decisions:
US v. Bryant (July 6, 2015)
US v. Bryant (September 30, 2014)

10th Circuit Decision:
US v. Shavanaux (July 26, 2011)

Related Stories:
Supreme Court debates 'inherent' tribal sovereignty in new ruling (6/9)
Supreme Court posts audio from hearing in domestic violence case (04/25)
SCOTUSBlog: Supreme Court has few questions in Indian law case (4/20)
Supreme Court case prompts spirited defense of tribal judiciary systems (4/19)
Turtle Talk: Commentary on oral argument in Supreme Court case (4/19)
Supreme Court ready to hear fourth Indian law case on the docket (4/18)
Bill in Senate expands tribal jurisdiction over non-Indian offenders (04/14)
Mary Annette Pember: Missing and murdered Indian women go forgotten (04/14)
Native Sun News: Wheels of justice slow for Oglala Sioux woman (04/08)
Vacancy on Supreme Court already impacts high-profile cases (03/30)
Leader of Navajo Nation pushes for action on Supreme Court pick (03/22)
Chair of Sault Ste. Marie Tribe calls for action on court nominee (03/17)
Supreme Court nominee comes with some Indian law experience (03/16)
Editorial: Scales of justice often lean wrong way for Indian people (03/15)
Alaska Natives seek fair consideration of Supreme Court nominee (03/14)
Supreme Court schedules hearing in Indian Country domestic violence case (03/11)
Diane Humetewa not under consideration for Supreme Court seat (3/11)
Gyasi Ross: Nominate Diane Humetewa to serve on Supreme Court (03/09)
Joe Biden: Senate Republicans must act on pick for Supreme Court (03/04)
Aaron Payment: Tribal sovereignty hangs in the balance at Supreme Court (02/29)
Steve Russell: Looking for an unbiased justice on Supreme Court (02/29)
Steven Newcomb: Justice Scalia didn't know anything about Indian law (02/26)
Updates from Day 2 of National Congress of American Indians winter session in D.C. (02/24)
Stakes raised as Supreme Court weighs domestic violence case (2/16)
John Lavelle: Supreme Court weighs key tribal sovereignty issue (2/10)
Samuel Winder: Indian defendants face harsher criminal penalties (2/4)
Ex-US Attorney welcomes review of domestic violence case (12/17)
Supreme Court agrees to review yet another Indian law dispute (12/14)
Former US Attorney backs review of domestic violence case (11/13)
Obama asks Supreme Court to hear domestic violence case (11/11)
Vice President Joe Biden reflects on triumphs of Obama's Indian policies (10/28)
Tribes still waiting on funds from Violence Against Women Act (10/16)
Pioneering tribes share experiences with prosecuting non-Indians (10/7)
DOJ awards $97M in grants for public safety in Indian Country (09/16)
Alaska to recognize tribal domestic violence protection orders (07/31)
Congress fails to provide funds to help tribes comply with VAWA (07/29)
Ambassador Harper discusses violence against indigenous women (07/09)
9th Circuit divided on tribal convictions in domestic violence cases (7/7)
Native Sun News: Oglala leader blames deaths on domestic violence (07/06)
Supreme Court won't accept tribal domestic violence case (3/19)
Supreme Court won't hear Indian domestic violence case (02/21)
Two Indian domestic violence cases before Supreme Court (12/12)
10th Circuit allows use of tribal court conviction in federal court (7/27)
8th Circuit accepts tribal court convictions for federal prosecution (7/7)