Me. Rev. Stat. » Title 30

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 30, § 6206

Powers and duties of the Indian tribes within their respective Indian territories

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
1.  General powers.  Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation, within their respective Indian territories, have and may exercise and enjoy all the rights, privileges, powers and immunities, including, but without limitation, the power to enact ordinances and collect taxes, and are subject to all the duties, obligations, liabilities and limitations of a municipality of and subject to the laws of the State, provided, however, that internal tribal matters, including membership in the respective tribe or nation, the right to reside within the respective Indian territories, tribal organization, tribal government, tribal elections, the use or disposition of settlement fund income and the exercise of power by the Passamaquoddy Tribe pursuant to section 6207, subsection 10, section 6207‑A and section 6209‑A, subsection 1, paragraph F and by the Penobscot Nation pursuant to section 6207, subsection 11, section 6207‑B and section 6209‑B, subsection 1, paragraph F, respectively, is not subject to regulation by the State. The Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation shall designate such officers and officials as are necessary to implement and administer those laws of the State applicable to the respective Indian territories and the residents thereof. Any resident of the Passamaquoddy Indian territory or the Penobscot Indian territory who is not a member of the respective tribe or nation nonetheless is equally entitled to receive any municipal or governmental services provided by the respective tribe or nation or by the State, except those services that are provided exclusively to members of the respective tribe or nation pursuant to state or federal law, and is entitled to vote in national, state and county elections in the same manner as any tribal member residing within Indian territory.  
[PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. B, §1 (AMD); PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. B, §9 (AFF).]
2.  Power to sue and be sued.  The Passamaquoddy Tribe, the Penobscot Nation and their members may sue and be sued in the courts of the State to the same extent as any other entity or person in the State provided, however, that the respective tribe or nation and its officers and employees shall be immune from suit when the respective tribe or nation is acting in its governmental capacity to the same extent as any municipality or like officers or employees thereof within the State.  
[PL 1979, c. 732, §§1, 31 (NEW).]
3.  Ordinances.  The Passamaquoddy Tribe and the Penobscot Nation each has the right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction within its respective Indian territory over violations by members of any federally recognized Indian tribe, nation, band or other group of tribal ordinances adopted pursuant to this section or section 6207. The decision to exercise or terminate the jurisdiction authorized by this section must be made by each tribal governing body. If either tribe or nation chooses not to exercise, or to terminate its exercise of, jurisdiction as authorized by this section or section 6207, the State has exclusive jurisdiction over violations of tribal ordinances by members of any federally recognized Indian tribe, nation, band or other group within the Indian territory of that tribe or nation. The State has exclusive jurisdiction over violations of tribal ordinances by persons not members of any federally recognized Indian tribe, nation, band or other group except as provided in the section or sections referenced in the following:  
A. Section 6209‑A.   [PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. B, §1 (NEW); PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. B, §3 (AFF).]
Revisor's Note: (Paragraph A as enacted by PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. A, §1 is REALLOCATED TO TITLE 30, SECTION 6206, SUBSECTION 3, PARAGRAPH B)
B. (REALLOCATED FROM T. 30, §6206, sub-§3, ¶A) Section 6209‑B.   [RR 2019, c. 2, Pt. A, §30 (RAL).]
[PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. E, §1 (AMD); PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. E, §5 (AFF).]
SECTION HISTORY
PL 1979, c. 732, §§1, 31 (NEW). PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. A, §1 (AMD). PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. A, §3 (AFF). PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. B, §1 (AMD). PL 2019, c. 621, Pt. B, §3 (AFF). RR 2019, c. 2, Pt. A, §30 (AMD). PL 2021, c. 650, §5 (AMD). PL 2021, c. 650, §13 (AFF). PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. B, §1 (AMD). PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. B, §9 (AFF). PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. E, §1 (AMD). PL 2023, c. 647, Pt. E, §5 (AFF).
The Revisor's Office cannot provide legal advice or interpretation of Maine law to the public.
If you need legal advice, please consult a qualified attorney.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2021 · leading case: Great Northern Paper, Inc. v. Penobscot Nation
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Great Northern Paper, Inc. v. Penobscot Nation (2001) me · cites it 15× “30 M.R.S.A. § 6206 (1996). 3 . Before us, the Tribes do not contend that the Superior Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.”
In re Children of Mary J. (2019) me · cites it 7× “See 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2017). Because we find no error in the court's determination, we affirm the court's denial of the Tribe's motion for intervention of right, filed pursuant to M.”
Penobscot Nation v. Stilphen (1983) me · cites it 5× “The Nation argued that chapter 13-A of title 17 does not apply to it because it is neither a person, a firm, an association, nor a corporation.”
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2005) me · cites it 7× “) granted a summary judgment in favor of Dana-Cummings, holding that the dispute between Francis and Dana-Cummings is an “internal tribal matter” pursuant to the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1) (1996) and should be resolved in the Tribal Court.”
Penobscot Nation v. Mills (2017) ca1 · cites it 4× “" See 30 M.R.S.A. §§ 6206, 6207. Congress -- House and Senate alike -- ratified the MIA on the understanding that the Nation's rights to hunt and to fish were both "expressly retained sovereign activities," and that the tribes had the "permanent right to control hunting and…”
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2007) me · cites it 3× “The Superior Court dismissed the action, holding that it involved “internal tribal matters” over which Maine courts lacked jurisdiction by operation of 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2006). Title 30 M.R.”
United States v. Newell (2011) ca1 “” 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206. This limitation on state jurisdiction was incorporated into the federal Settlement Act by reference.”
United States v. Boots (1996) ca1 · cites it 2× “See 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1) (“Except as otherwise provided in this Act, the Passamaquod-dy Tribe .”
Maine v. Johnson (2007) ca1 · cites it 4× “” 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1). This qualification does not apply to other Maine tribes, who are fully subject to Maine law.”
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2008) me · cites it 5× “Francis contends that the Superior Court erred in ruling that: (1) the Tribal Court, sitting without a jury, has exclusive jurisdiction pursuant to 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2007) to hear her claims against the PHA and the individually-named defendants; 1 (2) the court did not have…”
Francis v. Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy Housing Authority (1999) me · cites it 3× “See 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1) (1996). 2 The court noted that the State can exercise jurisdiction over the Passamaquoddy Tribe “provided, however, that internal tribal matters, including membership in the respective tribe or nation, the right to reside within the respective Indian…”
Tomer v. Maine Human Rights Commission (2008) me “The Pe-nobscot Nation requested that the Commission dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the dispute involves an internal tribal matter, and that, pursuant to 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2007), the Commission lacks subject matter jurisdiction to address Tomer’s claims.”
Show all 31 citing cases →
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 30, § 6206(1) — 27 cases
Great Northern Paper, Inc. v. Penobscot Nation (2001) me “30 M.R.S.A. § 6206 (1996). 3 . Before us, the Tribes do not contend that the Superior Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.”
In re Children of Mary J. (2019) me “See 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2017). Because we find no error in the court's determination, we affirm the court's denial of the Tribe's motion for intervention of right, filed pursuant to M.”
Penobscot Nation v. Stilphen (1983) me “The Nation argued that chapter 13-A of title 17 does not apply to it because it is neither a person, a firm, an association, nor a corporation.”
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2007) me “The Superior Court dismissed the action, holding that it involved “internal tribal matters” over which Maine courts lacked jurisdiction by operation of 30 M.R.S. § 6206(1) (2006). Title 30 M.R.”
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2005) me “) granted a summary judgment in favor of Dana-Cummings, holding that the dispute between Francis and Dana-Cummings is an “internal tribal matter” pursuant to the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1) (1996) and should be resolved in the Tribal Court.”
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 30, § 6206(2) — 4 cases
Great Northern Paper, Inc. v. Penobscot Nation (2001) me “30 M.R.S.A. § 6206 (1996). 3 . Before us, the Tribes do not contend that the Superior Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.”
Couturier v. Penobscot Indian Nation (1988) me
Francis v. Dana-Cummings (2005) me “) granted a summary judgment in favor of Dana-Cummings, holding that the dispute between Francis and Dana-Cummings is an “internal tribal matter” pursuant to the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1) (1996) and should be resolved in the Tribal Court.”
Aroostook Band of Micmacs v. Ryan (2005) med
— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 30, § 6206(3) — 2 cases
Maine v. Johnson (2007) ca1 “” 30 M.R.S.A. § 6206(1). This qualification does not apply to other Maine tribes, who are fully subject to Maine law.”
State v. Chambers (1994) me
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.