U.S. Code » Title 25 » Chapter CHAPTER 38— INDIAN TRIBAL JUSTICE SUPPORT

25 U.S.C. § 3601

Findings

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 25 CasesGoogle Scholar
The Congress finds and declares that—(1) there is a government-to-government relationship between the United States and each Indian tribe;(2) the United States has a trust responsibility to each tribal government that includes the protection of the sovereignty of each tribal government;(3) Congress, through statutes, treaties, and the exercise of administrative authorities, has recognized the self-determination, self-reliance, and inherent sovereignty of Indian tribes;(4) Indian tribes possess the inherent authority to establish their own form of government, including tribal justice systems;(5) tribal justice systems are an essential part of tribal governments and serve as important forums for ensuring public health and safety and the political integrity of tribal governments;(6) Congress and the Federal courts have repeatedly recognized tribal justice systems as the appropriate forums for the adjudication of disputes affecting personal and property rights;(7) traditional tribal justice practices are essential to the maintenance of the culture and identity of Indian tribes and to the goals of this chapter;(8) tribal justice systems are inadequately funded, and the lack of adequate funding impairs their operation; and(9) tribal government involvement in and commitment to improving tribal justice systems is essential to the accomplishment of the goals of this chapter.(Pub. L. 103–176, § 2, Dec. 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 2004.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Pub. L. 103–176, § 1, Dec. 3, 1993, 107 Stat. 2004, provided that: “This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Indian Tribal Justice Act’.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: John v. Baker, 982 P.2d 738 (Alaska 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
John v. Baker, 982 P.2d 738 (Alaska 1999). · cites it 4× “25 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. (West Supp.1998).”
MacArthur v. San Juan Cnty., 391 F. Supp. 2d 895 (D. Utah 2005). · cites it 4× “200, codified at 25 U.S.C.A. §§ 3601 et seq. (2001), creating an Office of Tribal Justice Support within the Bureau of Indian Affairs to provide technical assistance and training to Indian tribes for the development of tribal codes, court rules, court administration and case…”
South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 522 U.S. 329 (1998). “, 25 U. S. C. § 3601 , we must give effect to Congress’ intent in passing the 1894 Act.”
Kiowa Indian Tribe v. Hoover, 150 F.3d 1163 (10th Cir. 1998). “Federal recognition means Kiowa “is entitled to the immunities and privileges available to ... federally acknowledged Indian tribes by virtue of their.”
Norbert Kelsey v. Melissa Pope, 809 F.3d 849 (6th Cir. 2016). “” 25 U.S.C. § 3601 (4). Section 1300k-6 governs the establishment of the Band’s constitution, which includes *853 the creation of its tribal justice system.”
Gerald Hawkins v. Debra Haaland, 991 F.3d 216 (D.C. Cir. 2021). “It also expressly provided that the Act would not “affect in any manner any hunting, fishing, trapping, gathering, or water right of the tribe and its members.”
In Re Mm, 65 Cal. Rptr. 3d 273 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007). “" ( 25 U.S.C. § 3601 (4).) "[Although the tribal court is located within the geographic boundaries of the state, it is not a [California] court; it is the court of an independent sovereign.”
Diver v. Peterson, 524 N.W.2d 288 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “]") The Divers are members of the tribe and were employed as custodians in the tribal school on the reservation.”
Hoover v. Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma, 1998 OK 23 (Okla. 1998). “§ 3601 (1993) provides in pertinent part: "The Congress finds and declares that— (1) there is a govemment-to-govemment relationship between the United States and each Indian tribe; (2) the United States has a trust responsibility to each tribal government that includes the…”
MacArthur v. San Juan Cnty., 405 F. Supp. 2d 1302 (D. Utah 2005). “200 (1993), codified at 25 U.S.C.A. §§ 3601 et. seq. (2001). 8 . Pub.”
United States v. Headdress, 953 F. Supp. 1272 (D. Utah 1996). “See also Indian Tribal Justice Act, 25 U.S.C. § 3601 et seq. § 3601(5) “tribal justice system are an essential part of tribal government____” Therefore, even though Congress restricted the *1297 extent of sanction a tribal court can impose, 16 the tribal offense is not a federal…”
MacArthur v. San Juan Cnty., 566 F. Supp. 2d 1239 (D. Utah 2008). “recent legislation, such as the Indian Tribal Justice Act of 1993 and the Indian Tribal Justice Technical and Legal Assistance Act of 2000, was framed in terms firmly supportive of tribal self-government and effective tribal court systems, and recognizes “tribal justice systems…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.