Law

Washington court reverses on tribal pursuit off the reservation

Friday, September 2, 2011

Non-Indians who commit crimes in Indian Country can't be pursued off the reservation, the Washington Supreme Court ruled on Thursday.

By a 6-3 vote, the justices said the Lummi Nation lacks "inherent sovereign powers" to pursue offenders off the reservation. That's a complete reversal from a 6-3 decision last December and a 9-0 decision in September 2009.

"The State is correct that preventing tribal police from stopping and detaining drivers off the reservation would 'undercut the tribe's ability to enforce tribal law' by encouraging drivers to race for the reservation border and escape detention," Justice Mary E. Fairhurst wrote for the majority.

"While this is troubling on a policy level, the concept of territorial jurisdiction necessarily limits any sovereign’s ability to fully enforce its laws," Fairhurst continued.

Last December, Fairhurst was in the minority when she opined that the tribe lacked authority to pursue non-Indian offenders off the reservation. In her dissent at the time, she suggested that the tribe couldn't even hold the offender while state police arrive.

Fairhurst's views are now in the majority opinion issued yesterday.

Get the Story:
No ‘hot pursuit’ for tribal police; High court reverses course (The Seattle Post-Intelligencer 9/1)
Washington SCT (On Reconsideration) Holds 4-3 that Tribal Law Enforcement Authority Stops at Rez Boundaries (Turtle Talk 9/1)

Washington Supreme Court Decision:
Washington v. Eriksen | Dissent [Alexander] | Dissent [Owens]