25 U.S.C. § 1323

Retrocession of jurisdiction by State

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 25 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Acceptance by United States

The United States is authorized to accept a retrocession by any State of all or any measure of the criminal or civil jurisdiction, or both, acquired by such State pursuant to the provisions of section 1162 of title 18, section 1360 of title 28, or section 7 of the Act of August 15, 1953 (67 Stat. 588), as it was in effect prior to its repeal by subsection (b) of this section.

(b) Repeal of statutory provisions

Section 7 of the Act of August 15, 1953 (67 Stat. 588), is hereby repealed, but such repeal shall not affect any cession of jurisdiction made pursuant to such section prior to its repeal.

(Pub. L. 90–284, title IV, § 403, Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 79.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 7 of the Act of August 15, 1953, referred to in text, is section 7 of act Aug. 15, 1953, ch. 505, 67 Stat. 588, which is set out as a note under section 1360 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Executive DocumentsEx. Ord. No. 11435. Designating Secretary of the Interior To Accept Retrocession of Jurisdiction by State

Ex. Ord. No. 11435, Nov. 21, 1968, 33 F.R. 17339, provided:

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 465 of the Revised Statutes (25 U.S.C. 9) and as President of the United States, the Secretary of the Interior is hereby designated and empowered to exercise, without the approval, ratification, or other action of the President or of any other officer of the United States, any and all authority conferred upon the United States by Section 403(a) of the Act of April 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 79 (25 U.S.C. 1323(a)): Provided, That acceptance of retrocession of all or any measure of civil or criminal jurisdiction, or both, by the Secretary hereunder shall be effected by publication in the Federal Register of a notice which shall specify the jurisdiction retroceded and the effective date of the retrocession: Provided further, That acceptance of such retrocession of criminal jurisdiction shall be effected only after consultation by the Secretary with the Attorney General.

Lyndon B. Johnson.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 63 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1971–2022 · leading case: Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation, 439 U.S. 463 (1979).
Washington v. Confederated Bands & Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation, 439 U.S. 463 (1979). · cites it 6× “25 U. S. C. § 1323 (a). Section 7 itself was repealed with the proviso that the repeal was not intended to affect any cession made prior to the repeal.”
State v. Hoffman, 804 P.2d 577 (Wash. 1991). · cites it 6× “25 U.S.C. § 1323 (b) (1988) specifically provides: Section 7 of the Act of August 15, 1953 ( 67 Stat.”
Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978). · cites it 2× “[16] In 25 U. S. C. § 1323 (b), Congress expressly repealed § 7 of the Act of Aug.”
Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Eng'g, P. C., 467 U.S. 138 (1984). · cites it 2× “[11] See 25 U. S. C. § 1323 (a); 2 U. S. Dept. of Interior, Opinions of the Solicitor Relating to Indian Affairs, 1917-1974, pp.”
Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Eng'g, P. C., 476 U.S. 877 (1986). · cites it 2× “When Congress subsequently revisited the question of retrocession in the 1968 amendments, it provided that "[t]he United States is authorized to accept a retrocession by any State," 25 U. S. C. § 1323 (a), but it specifically limited this authorization to the retrocession of…”
Omaha Tribe of Nebraska v. Vill. of Walthill, 334 F. Supp. 823 (D. Neb. 1971). · cites it 9× “Even assuming that the Nebraska Supreme Court would hold that the resolution, under consideration herein, is in *831 valid this writer is of the opinion such a holding could not upset an otherwise valid retrocession under 25 U.”
State Ex Rel. Stephan v. Finney, 836 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1992). · cites it 3× “For her next point, the respondent Governor calls our attention to 25 U.S.C. § 1323 (1988) and certain cases arising thereunder.”
Yakama Nation v. Yakima Cnty., 963 F.3d 982 (9th Cir. 2020). · cites it 2× “Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 1323 (a), the Proclamation retroceded, “in part,” civil and criminal jurisdiction over the Yakama Nation to the United States, but retained jurisdiction over matters “involving non-Indian defendants and non-Indian victims.”
Ann Walker v. Honorable Betty Rushing, Chief Just., Omaha Tribal Court, Omaha Tribe of Nebraska, 898 F.2d 672 (8th Cir. 1990). · cites it 4× “79 , codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1323 (a). The United States Secretary of Interior was designated by the President to accept such retrocession on behalf of the United States.”
United States v. Brown, 334 F. Supp. 536 (D. Neb. 1971). · cites it 7× “United States 21 , even if statutory language is unambiguous, if the literal words [of a statute] bring about [a result] “plainly at variance with the purpose of the legislation as a whole”, legislative purpose is followed rather than the literal words *• * However, the Court…”
Comenout v. Burdman, 525 P.2d 217 (Wash. 1974). · cites it 6× “25 U.S.C. § 1323 (1968). On August 15, 1968, again at the request of the Quinault Tribe, Governor Evans issued a proclamation declaring that former Governor Rosellini's proclamation of May 15, 1958, was revoked and null and void, and retroceded the jurisdiction exercised by the…”
Enter. Mgmt. Consultants, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Tax Comm'n, 768 P.2d 359 (Okla. 1988). · cites it 2× “" [6] Title 25 U.S.C. § 1323 (1983) provides: "(a) The United States is authorized to accept a retrocession by any State of all or any measure of the criminal or civil jurisdiction, or both, acquired by such State pursuant to the provisions of section 1162 of Title 18, section…”
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.