Tribal Jurisdictional Status Analysis

Updated February 16, 2010
Carole Goldberg
Jonathan D. Varat Professor of Law
UCLA School of Law

This updated analysis describes the legislation and case law pertaining to the jurisdiction of tribes in relationship to state jurisdiction. The tribes are separated into four groups, based upon the jurisdictional framework affecting tribal and state authority for that particular tribe. In cases where the tribes in a state do not fit into a single group, states may be listed in more than one group.

• Group 1 includes tribes found in states with no federal legislative mandate to assume jurisdiction over tribes found within their borders, or where states have achieved federal authorization to exercise jurisdiction but have chosen to return or retrocede that jurisdiction back to the federal government; it also includes states that have attempted to exercise a federal legislative mandate to assume jurisdiction but have been unable to do so effectively (i.e., a court has found the attempt invalid);
• Group 2 includes tribes in states where Public Law 280 mandates states to assume some jurisdiction, concurrent with the tribes, over federally recognized tribes within their borders;
• Group 3 includes tribes in states which have assumed jurisdiction to any degree pursuant to the state option provisions of Public Law 280;
• Group 4 includes tribes whose states have received a federal mandate to exercise jurisdiction outside of Public Law 280, e.g., through state-wide enactments, restoration acts, or land claims settlement acts.

Governing legislation, pertinent case law, and the tribes included in the boundaries of a state are listed for each state. The types of courts for each tribe, if any, are indicated by a key. The kinds of courts included are tribal courts (*) and Courts of Indian Offenses (#).

There are some specific federal statutes, such as the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), that affect state and tribal jurisdiction in all four groups of states. These arrangements will not be detailed here, except insofar as individual tribes have reassumed exclusive tribal jurisdiction under ICWA in a Group 2, 3, or 4 state.

Group 1 – No State Jurisdiction

Alabama – (1)

• Legislation
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Sheffield v. Tullis, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14110 (S. D. Ala. 1998)
• Tribes
  • Poarch Band of Creek Indians*

Arizona – 21

• Legislation
  • Ariz. Const., art. 20, ¶ 4
  • No current Public Law 280 or similar legislation 1
• Case Law
  • Bressi v. Ford, 575 F.3d 891 (9th Cir. Ariz. 2009)
  • Elliott v. White Mt. Apache Tribal Court, 566 F.3d 842 (9th Cir. Ariz. 2009)
  • Ford Motor Co. v. Todecheene, 474 F.3d 1196 (9th Cir. 2007)
  • State v. Zaman, 194 Ariz. 442 (1999)
  • State v. Lupe, 889 P.2d 4 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1994)
  • Tohono O’odham Nation v. Schwartz, 837 F. Supp. 1024 (D. Ariz. 1993)
  • Dixon v. Picopa Constr. Co., 160 Ariz. 251 (1989)
  • State v. Flint, 157 Ariz. 227 (1989)
  • Val/Del, Inc. v. Superior Court, 145 Ariz. 558, 703 P.2d 502 (Ariz. App. 1985)
  • United States v. Superior Court In and For Maricopa County, 144 Ariz. 265 (1985)
  • Arizona v. San Carlos Apache Tribe of Arizona, 463 U.S. 545 (1983)
  • Francisco v. State, 113 Ariz. 427 (1976)
  • McClanahan v. Ariz. State Tax Comm’n, 411 U.S. 164 (1973)
  • Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217 (1959)
  • In re Denteclaw, 83 Ariz. 299 (1958)
• Tribes
  • Ak Chin Indian Community*
  • Cocopah Tribe*
  • Colorado River Indian Tribes (also in CA)*
  • Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation*
  • Fort Mojave Indian Tribe (also in CA & NV)*
  • Gila River Indian Community*
  • Havasupai Tribe*
  • Hopi Tribe*
  • Hualapai Indian Tribe*
  • Kaibab Band of Paiute Indians*
  • Navajo Nation (also in NM & UT)*
  • Quechan Tribe (also in CA)*
  • Pascua Yaqui Tribe* (originally subject to state jurisdiction under 25 U.S.C. § 1300f(c); retrocession accepted, 50 Fed. Reg. 34,555 (Aug.26, 1985))
  • Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community*
  • San Carlos Apache Tribe*
  • San Juan Southern Paiute Tribe
  • Tohono O’odham Nation*
  • Tonto Apache Tribe*
  • White Mountain Apache Tribe*
  • Yavapai-Apache Nation*
  • Yavapai-Prescott Tribe*

Louisiana – 4

• Legislation
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Meyer & Assocs. v. Coushatta Tribe of La., 992 So. 2d 446 (La. 2008)
  • Tunica-Biloxi Indians of La. v. Pecot, 351 F. Supp.2d 519 (W.D. La. 2004)
  • Owens v. Willock, 690 So.2d 948 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1997)
  • La. Dep’t of Revenue &Taxation v. Chitimacha Tribe, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16916 (W.D. La. 1987)
  • Langley v. Ryder, 602 F. Supp. 335 (W.D.La.), aff’d, 778 F.2d 1092 (5th Cir. 1985)
• Tribes
  • Chitimacha Tribe*
  • Coushatta Tribe*
  • Jena Band of Choctaw Indians*
  • Tunica-Biloxi Indian Tribe*

Massachusetts – 1

• Legislation
  • See Group 4 (Massachusetts Indian Land Claim Settlement Act; Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head)
• Case Law
  • Bingham v. Maushop, LLC, 2007 Mass. Super. LEXIS 613, 24 Mass. L. Rep. 355 (Mass. Super. Ct. 2007)
• Tribe
  • Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe* (recognized through OFA administrative process, 72 Fed. Reg. 8007 (2007))

Michigan – 12

• Legislation
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
  • 25 U.S.C. § 1300j-7 (granting Pokagon Band ICWA jurisdiction over service area)
• Case Law
  • Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Granholm, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 86684 ( E.D. Mich. Oct. 22, 2008)
  • United States v. Genschow, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 92873 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 14, 2008)
  • Match-e-benash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians v. Engler, 304 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. 2002)
  • Lincoln v. Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe, 967 F. Supp. 966 (E.D. Mich. 1997)
  • United States ex rel. Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe v. Michigan, 106 F.3d 130 (6th Cir. 1996)
  • Peterson v. Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, 1994 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 1486 (W.D. Mich. 1994)
  • Wisconsin Potowatomies of Hannahville Indian Community v. Houston, 393 F. Supp. 719 (W.D. Mich. 1973)
  • People v. Jondreau, 15 Mich.App. 169 (Mich. App. 1968), rev’d, 384 Mich. 539 (1971)
• Tribes
  • Bay Mills Indian Community*
  • Grand Traverse Bay of Ottawa & Chippewa Indians*
  • Hannahville Indian Community*
  • Huron Potawatomi Tribe*
  • Keweenaw Bay Indian Community*
  • Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians*
  • Little River Band of Ottawa Indians*
  • Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians*
  • Match-e-benash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians*
  • Pokagon Band of Potawatomi Indians*
  • Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe*
  • Sault Ste. Marie Band of Chippewa Indians*

Mississippi – 1

• Legislation
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Dolgen Corp. v. Miss. Band of Choctaw Indians, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 103409 (S.D. Miss. Dec. 19, 2008)
  • Graham v. Applied Geo Techs., Inc., 593 F. Supp. 2d 915 (S.D. Miss. 2008)
  • Jones v. Billy, 798 So.2d 1238 (Miss. 2001)
  • Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield, 490 U.S. 30 (1989)
  • United States v. John, 437 U.S. 634 (1978), on remand, 587 F.2d 683 (5th Cir. 1979)
  • Tubby v. State, 327 So.2d 272 (Miss. 1976)
• Tribes
  • Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians*

Montana – 7 (one tribe partially affected by Public Law 280)

• Legislation
  • Mont. Const., Ord. 1
  • Mont. Code Ann. §§ 2-1-302 to 2-1-307 (as of 1963, assuming criminal jurisdiction over Salish/Kootenai Reservation and over any other tribe with consent, though none consented)
  • 60 Fed. Reg. 33,318 (1995) (partially retroceding jurisdiction over Salish/Kootenai Reservation regarding misdemeanors)
• Case Law
  • United States v. Cruz, 554 F.3d 840 (9th Cir. 2009)
  • Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co., 128 S. Ct. 2709 (U.S. 2008)
  • Marceau v. Blackfeet Hous. Auth., 540 F.3d 916 (9th Cir. Mont. 2008)
  • Stewart v. Rice, 2008 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 672 (Mont. Dist. Ct. 2008)
  • Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes v. Clinch, 2007 MT 63 (Mont. 2007)
  • Routh v. Miller, 2007 Mont. Dist. LEXIS 719 (Mont. Dist. Ct. 2007)
  • Smith v. Salish Kootenai College, 434 F.3d 1127 (9th Cir. 2006)
  • Zempel v. Liberty, 2006 MT 220 (Mont. 2006)
  • United States v. Bruce, 394 F.3d 1215 (9th Cir. 2005)
  • In re Marriage of Wyatt, 2005 MT 320N (Mont. Dec. 19, 2005)
  • Nielsen v. Brocksmith Land & Livestock, Inc., 2004 MT 101 (Mont. 2004)
  • Bradley v. Crow Tribe of Indians, 2003 MT 82 (Mont. 2003)
  • Flat Ctr. Farms v. Dep't of Revenue, 2002 MT 140 (Mont. 2002)
  • Balyeat Law, PC v. Pettit, 967 P.2d 398 (Mont. 1998)
  • State v. Spotted Blanket, 955 P.2d 1347 (Mont. 1998)
  • In re Marriage of Wellman, 852 P.2d 559 (Mont. 1993)
  • American States Ins. Co. v. McDougall, 18 Indian L. Rep. 3075 (U.S.D. Mont. 1991)
  • First v. State Dept. of Social and Rehabilitation Services ex rel. LaRoche, 808 P.2d 467 (Mont. 1991)
  • State v. LaPier, 790 P.2d 983 (Mont. 1990)
  • Liberty v. Jones, 782 P.2d 369 (Mont. 1989)
  • State v. Thomas, 760 P.2d 96 (Mont. 1988)
  • State ex rel. Greely v. Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of Flathead Reservation, 712 P.2d 754 (Mont. 1985)
  • In re Marriage of Limpy, 636 P.2d 266 (Mont. 1981)
  • Larrivee v. Morigeau, 602 P.2d 563 (Mont. 1979)
  • Fisher v. District Court of Sixteenth Judicial Dist., 424 U.S. 382 (1976)
  • Bad Horse v. Bad Horse, 517 P.2d 893 (Mont. 1974)
  • United States v. Pollmann, 364 F. Supp. 995 (D. Mont. 1973)
  • State ex rel. Irvine v. District Court of 4th Judicial Dist., 239 P.2d 272 (Mont. 1951)
  • Draper v. United States, 164 U.S. 240 (1896)
• Tribes
  • Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation*
  • Blackfeet Tribe*
  • Chippewa-Cree Indians of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation*
  • Confederated Salish & Kootenai Tribes (state jurisdiction over felonies only)*
  • Crow Tribe*
  • Fort Belknap Indian Community*
  • Northern Cheyenne Tribe*

Nevada – 19

• Legislation
  • No current Public Law 280 or similar legislation 2
• Case Law
  • Paddy v. Mulkey, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81456 (D. Nev. Aug. 21, 2009)
  • Nevada v. Hicks, 533 U.S. 353 (2001)
  • Washoe Tribe of Nev. & Cal. v. Southwest Gas Corp., 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7087 (D. Nev. 2000)
  • Snooks v. District Court, 112 Nev. 798, 919 P.2d 1064 (1996)
  • Amarok Corp. v. Nevada Dep't of Taxation, 935 F.2d 1068 (9th Cir. 1991)
  • Adams v. Adams, 107 Nev. 790, 820 P.2d 752 (1991)
  • Patterson v. Four Rent, Inc., 101 Nev. 651, 707 P.2d 1147 (1985)
  • Jones v. State, 94 Nev. 679, 585 P.2d 1340 (1978)
  • State v. Jones, 92 Nev. 116, 546 P.2d 235 (1976)
• Tribes
  • Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation (also in UT)*
  • Duckwater Shoshone Tribe*
  • Ely Shoshone Tribe*
  • Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribes (also in OR)*
  • Fort Mojave Indian Tribe (also in AZ & CA)*
  • Las Vegas Tribe of Paiute Indians*
  • Lovelock Paiute Tribe*
  • Moapa Band of Paiute Indians*
  • Paiute-Shoshone Tribe of the Fallon Reservation and Colony*
  • Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe*
  • Reno-Sparks Indian Colony*
  • Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Reservation*
  • Summit Lake Paiute Tribe#
  • Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians#
  • Walker River Paiute Tribe*
  • Washoe Tribe (also in CA)*
  • Winnemucca Indian Colony#
  • Yerington Paiute Tribe*
  • Yomba Shoshone Tribe*

New Mexico – 23

• Legislation
  • N.M. Const., art. XXI, § 2
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Hydro Res., Inc. v. United States EPA, 562 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2009)
  • Garcia v. Gutierrez, 2009 NMSC 44 (N.M. 2009)
  • State v. Atcitty, 2009 NMCA 86 (N.M. Ct. App. 2009)
  • State v. Quintana, 143 N.M. 535 (N.M. 2008)
  • State v. Harrison, 144 N.M. 651 (N.M. Ct. App. 2008)
  • Doe v. Santa Clara Pueblo, 141 N.M. 269 (N.M. 2007)
  • Walton v. Tesuque Pueblo, 443 F.3d 1274 (10th Cir. 2006)
  • United States v. Arrieta, 436 F.3d 1246 (10th Cir. N.M. 2006)
  • State v. Romero, 140 N.M. 299 (N.M. 2006)
  • Jicarilla Apache Tribe v. Board of County Comm’rs, 118 N.M. 550 (1994)
  • Wacondo v. Concha, 873 P.2d 276 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994)
  • State v. Pena, 117 N.M. 528, 873 P.2d 274 (N.M. Ct. App. 1994)
  • State v. Ortiz, 105 N.M. 308, 731 P.2d 1352 (1986)
  • Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Pueblo of Santa Ana, 472 U.S. 237 (1985)
  • Blatchford v. Gonzales, 100 N.M. 333, 670 P.2d 944 (1983)
  • Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe, 455 U.S. 130 (1982)
  • Joe v. Marcum, 621 F.2d 358 (10th Cir. 1980)
  • Chino v. Chino, 90 N.M. 203 (1977)
  • State Sec., Inc. v. Anderson, 84 N.M. 629 (1973)
  • Sangre de Cristo Development Corp. v. City of Santa Fe, 84 N.M. 343 (1972)
  • Paiz v. Hughes, 76 N.M. 562 (1966)
  • Batchelor v. Charley, 74 N.M. 717 (1965)
  • State v. Warner, 71 N.M. 418 (1963)
• Tribes
  • Jicarilla Apache Nation*
  • Mescalero Apache*
  • Navajo Nation (also in AZ & UT)*
  • Pueblo of Acoma*
  • Pueblo of Cochiti*
  • Pueblo of Isleta*
  • Pueblo of Jemez*
  • Pueblo of Laguna*
  • Pueblo of Nambe*
  • Pueblo of Picuris*
  • Pueblo of Pojoaque*
  • Pueblo of San Felipe*
  • Pueblo of San Ildefonso*
  • Pueblo of San Juan*
  • Pueblo of Sandia*
  • Pueblo of Santa Ana*
  • Pueblo of Santa Clara*
  • Pueblo of Santo Domingo*
  • Pueblo of Taos*
  • Pueblo of Tesuque*
  • Pueblo of Zia*
  • Ute Mountain Tribe (also in Co & NM)*
  • Zuni Tribe*

North Carolina – 1

• Legislation
  • N.C. Const. art. IV, § 2
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Hatcher v. Harrah's NC Casino Co., LLC, 610 S.E.2d 210 (N.C. Ct. App. 2005)
  • Jackson County v. Swayney, 352 S.E.2d 413 (N.C. 1987)
  • Wildcatt v. Smith, 316 S.E.2d 870 (N.C. App. 1984)
  • Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians v. Lynch, 632 F. 2d 373, 377-78 (4th Cir. 1980)
  • Sasser v. Beck, 253 S.E.2d 577 (N.C. App. 1979)
  • Haile v. Saunooke, 148 F. Supp. 604, 607 (W.D.N.C. 1947), aff'd, 246 F.2d 293 (4th Cir. 1957)
• Tribes
  • Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians*

North Dakota – 3

• Legislation 3
  • See Group 4 (Spirit Lake Tribe)
• Case Law
  • Luger v. Luger, 2009 ND 84 (N.D. 2009)
  • Kelly v. Kelly, 2009 ND 20 (N.D. 2009)
  • State ex rel. Workforce Safety & Ins. v. JFK Raingutters, LLC, 2007 ND 80 (N.D. 2007)
  • Rolette County Soc. Serv. Bd. v. B.E., 2005 ND 101 (N.D. 2005)
  • Winer v. Penny Enters., 674 N.W.2d 9 (N.D. 2004)
  • Strate v. A-1 Contractors, 520 U.S. 438 (1994)
  • State v. Gohl, 477 N.W.2d 205 (N.D. 1991)
  • State v. Hook, 476 N.W.2d 565 (N.D. 1991) (overruling State v. Lohnes, 69 N.W.2d 508 (N.D. 1955))
  • Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Eng’g, 476 U.S. 877 (1986)
  • Schantz v. White Lightning, 231 N.W.2d 812 (N.D. 1975)
  • Gourneau v. Smith, 207 N.W.2d 256 (N.D. 1973) (overruling Vermillion v. Spotted Elk, 85 N.W.2d 432 (N.D. 1957))
  • State ex rel. Baker v. Mountrail County, 149 N.W. 120 (N.D. 1914)
• Tribes
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (also in SD)*
  • Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation*
  • Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians*

Oklahoma – 37

• Legislation
  • Okla. Const., art. 3, § 1
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
  • See Act of June 28, 1898, §§ 11-17, 22-23, 30 Stat. 495 (allotment of OK tribal lands)
• Case Law
  • Osage Nation v. State ex rel. Okla. Tax Comm'n, 597 F. Supp. 2d 1250 (N.D. Okla. 2009)
  • Cossey v. Cherokee Nation Enters., LLC, 2009 OK 6 (Okla. 2009)
  • Dye v. Choctaw Casino of Pocola, 2009 OK 52 (Okla. 2009)
  • Bittle v. Bahe, 2008 OK 10 (Okla. 2008)
  • Murphy v. Sirmons, 497 F. Supp. 2d 1257 (E.D. Okla. 2007)
  • Miner Elec., Inc. v. Muscogee (Creek) Nation, 505 F.3d 1007 (10th Cir. Okla. 2007)
  • Cherokee Nation of Okla. v. Norton, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 2773 (10th Cir. Okla. Feb. 16, 2005)
  • C & L Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe, 532 U.S. 411 (2001)
  • United States v. Roberts, 185 F.3d 1125 (10th Cir. 1999)
  • Kiowa Tribe of Oklahoma v. Manufacturing Technologies, Inc., 523 U.S. 751 (1998)
  • Mustang Prod. Co. v. Harrison, 94 F.3d 1382 (10th Cir. 1996)
  • Oklahoma Tax Comm’n v. Chickasaw Nation, 515 U.S. 450 (1995)
  • Buzzard v. Oklahoma Tax Comm’n, 992 F.2d 1073 (10th Cir. 1993)
  • Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Citizen Band, Potawatomi Indian Tribe of Oklahoma, 498 U.S. 505 (1991)
  • United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians v. State of Okla. ex rel. Moss, 927 F.2d 1170 (10th Cir. 1991)
  • Richardson v. Malone, 762 F. Supp. 1463 (N.D. Okla. 1991)
  • Ross v. Neff, 905 F.2d 1349 (10th Cir. 1990)
  • Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma v. State of Oklahoma ex rel. Thompson, 874 F.2d 790 (10th Cir. 1989)
  • State v. Klindt, 782 P.2d 401 (Okl. Crim. App. 1989)
  • State ex rel. May v. Seneca-Cayuga Tribe, 711 P.2d 77 (Okl. 1985)
  • Ahboah v. Hous. Auth. of the Kiowa Tribe, 660 P.2d 625 (Okl. 1983)
  • Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes of Oklahoma v. State of Oklahoma, 618 F.2d 665 (10th Cir. 1980), appeal after remand, 681 F.2d 705 (10th Cir. 1982)
  • Goforth v. State, 644 P.2d 114 (Okl. Cr. 1978)
  • State v. Littlechief, 573 P.2d 263 (Okl. Cr. 1978)
• Tribes
  • Absentee-Shawnee Tribe*
  • Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town#
  • Apache Tribe#
  • Caddo Indian Tribe#
  • Cherokee Nation*
  • Cheyenne-Arapaho Tribes*
  • Chickasaw Nation*
  • Choctaw Nation#
  • Citizen Potawatomi Nation*
  • Comanche Nation#
  • Delaware Nation#
  • Eastern Shawnee Tribe#
  • Fort Sill Apache Tribe#
  • Iowa Tribe*
  • Kaw Nation*
  • Kialegee Tribal Town*
  • Kickapoo Tribe*
  • Kiowa Indian Tribe#
  • Miami Tribe#
  • Modoc Tribe#
  • Muscogee (Creek) Nation*
  • Osage Tribe*
  • Otoe-Missouri Tribe#
  • Ottawa Tribe#
  • Pawnee Nation*
  • Peoria Tribe of Indians#
  • Ponca Tribe of Indians*
  • Quapaw Tribe of Indians#
  • Sac & Fox Nation*
  • Seminole Nation#
  • Seneca- Cayuga Tribe#
  • Shawnee Tribe
  • Thlopthlocco Tribal Town
  • Tonkawa Tribe of Indians*
  • United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians*
  • Wichita and Affiliated Tribes#
  • Wyandotte Tribe#

South Dakota – 9

• Legislation
  • S.D. Const., art. XXII, § 2
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation 4
• Case Law
  • Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co., 128 S. Ct. 2709 (2008)
  • Yankton Sioux Tribe v. Podhradsky, 577 F.3d 951 (8th Cir. S.D. 2009)
  • Oglala Sioux Tribe v. C & W Enters., 542 F.3d 224 (8th Cir. S.D. 2008)
  • Langdeau v. Langdeau, 751 N.W.2d 722 (S.D. 2008)
  • Gilbert v. Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe, 725 N.W.2d 249 (S.D. 2006)
  • State v. Cummings, 679 N.W.2d 484 (S.D. 2004)
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. Janklow, 103 F. Supp. 2d 1146 (D.S.D. 2000)
  • United States v. Phelps, 168 F.3d 1048 (8th Cir. 1999)
  • South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe, 522 U.S. 329 (1998)
  • South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679 (1993)
  • State v. Spotted Horse, 462 N.W.2d 463 (S.D. 1990)
  • South Dakota v. Larson, 455 N.W.2d 600 (S.D. 1990)
  • Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, 900 F.2d 1164 (8th Cir. 1990)
  • United States v. High Elk, 715 F. Supp. 285 (D.S.D. 1989)
  • Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice, 718 F. Supp. 755 (D.S.D. 1989), order rev’d, 897 F.2d 385 (8th Cir. 1990)
  • Solem v. Bartlett, 464 U.S. 463 (1984)
  • Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Kneip, 430 U.S. 584 (1977)
  • DeCoteau v. District Court for Tenth Judicial Dist., 420 U.S. 425 (1975)
  • State v. Molash, 86 S.D. 558, 199 N.W.2d 591 (1972)
  • Smith v. Temple, 82 S.D. 650, 152 N.W.2d 547 (1967)
• Tribes
  • Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe*
  • Crow Creek Sioux Tribe*
  • Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe*
  • Lower Brule Sioux Tribe*
  • Oglala Sioux Tribe*
  • Rosebud Sioux Tribe*
  • Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe*
  • Standing Rock Sioux Tribe*
  • Yankton Sioux Tribe*

Utah – 6

• Legislation 5
  • Ute Termination Act, ch. 1009, § 1, 68 Stat. 868, Aug. 27, 1954, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 677 et seq. (terminating federal supervision of property belonging to mixed blood members of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation)
• Case Law
  • Reber v. Steele, 570 F.3d 1206 (10th Cir. 2009)
  • Wopsock v. Natchees, 279 Fed. Appx. 679 (10th Cir. 2008) (unpublished opinion)
  • MacArthur v. San Juan County, 497 F.3d 1057 (10th Cir. 2007)
  • State v. Reber, 2007 UT 36 (Utah 2007)
  • Gardner v. Ute Tribal Court Chief Judge, 36 Fed. Appx. 927 (10th Cir. 2002) (unpublished opinion)
  • Hagen v. Utah, 510 U.S. 399 (1994)
  • Gardner v. United States, 1994 U.S. App. LEXIS 10090 (10th Cir. 1994) (limited citation)
  • Lyda v. Tah-Bone, 962 F. Supp. 1434 (D. Utah 1997)
  • State ex rel. D.A.C., 933 P.2d 993 (Utah Ct. App. 1997)
  • Maryboy v. Utah State Tax Comm'n, 904 P.2d 662 (Utah 1995)
  • State v. Gardner, 827 P.2d 980 (Utah Ct. App. 1992)
  • Brough v. Appawora, 553 P.2d 934 (Utah 1976)
  • State v. Roedl, 155 P.2d 741 (Utah 1945)
• Tribes
  • Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation (also in NV)*
  • Navajo Nation (also in AZ & NM)*
  • Northwestern Band of Shoshoni Nation
  • Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians
  • Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah & Ouray Reservation*
  • Ute Mountain Ute (also in NM and CO)#

Wyoming – 2

• Legislation
  • Wyom. Const., Art 21, § 26
  • No Public Law 280 or similar legislation
• Case Law
  • Colyer v. State, 203 P.3d 1104 (Wyo. 2009)
  • Yellowbear v. State, 174 P.3d 1270 (Wyo. 2008)
  • In re General Adjudication of All Rights to Use Water in the Big Horn River System, 753 P.2d 76 (1988), aff’d by equally divided vote sub nom. Wyoming v. United States, 492 U.S. 406 (1989)
  • Vialpando v. State, 640 P.2d 77 (Wyo. 1982)
  • State ex rel. Peterson v. District Court of Ninth Judicial Dist., 617 P.2d 1056 (Wyo. 1980)
  • Blackburn v. State, 357 P.2d 174 (Wyo. 1960)
• Tribes
  • Arapahoe Tribe of the Wind River Reservation*
  • Shoshone Tribe of the Wind River Reservation*

Group 2 – Mandatory Public 280 States

Alaska – 239 -- see below

• Legislation
  • Alas. Const., art. XII, § 12
  • P.L. 85-615 § 1, 72 Stat. 545 (Aug. 8, 1958) 6
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22
  • P.L. 91-523 § 1, Nov. 25, 1970; 84 Stat. 1358; 18 U.S.C. § 1162(a) (excepting Metlakatla Indian Tribe from state criminal jurisdiction).
  • 25 U.S.C. § 1918 (Two Native villages, Barrow and Chevak, have successfully petitioned for reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction over Indian Child Welfare Act matters. 64 Fed. Reg. 36,391 (July 6, 1999). The Metlakatla Indian Community has successfully petitioned for reassumption of concurrent jurisdiction over such matters. 58 Fed. Reg. 11,766 (February 26, 1993), as corrected at 58 Fed. Reg. 16,448 (March 26, 1993).
• Case Law
  • Shageluk Ira Council v. Office of Children's Servs., 2009 Alas. LEXIS 25 (Alaska Mar. 18, 2009) 2004 Op. Alas. Att’y Gen. No. 1
  • In the Matter of C.R.H., 29 P.3d 849 (Alas. 2001)
  • John v. Baker, 982 P.2d 738 (Alas. 1999)
  • Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie, 522 U.S. 520 (1998)
  • Jones v. State, 936 P.2d 1263 (Alask. Ct. App. 1997)
  • Hydaburg Coop. Ass’n v. Hydaburg Fisheries, 925 P.2d 246 (Alas. 1996)
  • Booth v. Alaska, 903 P.2d 1079 (Alas. Ct. App. 1995)
  • Nenana Fuel Co. Inc. v. Native Village of Venetie, 834 P.2d 1229 (Alas. 1992)
  • Native Village of Venetie I.R.A. Council v. Alaska, 944 F.2d 548 (9th Cir. 1991), rev’d on other grounds, Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie, 522 U.S. 520 (1998)
  • Chilkat Indian Village v. Johnson, 870 F.2d 1469 (9th Cir. Alaska 1989)
  • Harrison v. State, 784 P.2d 681 (Alas. Ct. App. 1989)
  • Fawcett v. Fawcett, 13 Indian L. Rep. 5063 (Alas. Super. Ct. 1986)
  • Heffner v. State, 633 P.2d 264 (Alas. 1981)
  • State of Alaska, Dep’t Pub. Works v. Agli, 472 F. Supp. 70 (D.C. Alas. 1979)
  • Calista Corp. v. Mann, 564 P.2d 53 (Alas. 1977)
  • Ollestead v. Native Village of Tyonek, 560 P.2d 31 (Alas. 1977)
  • State v. Lewis, 559 P.2d 630 (Alas. 1977)
  • Organized Village of Kake v. Egan, 369 U.S. 60 (1962)
  • Metlakatla Indian Community v. Egan, 369 U.S. 45 (1962)
  • United States v. Booth, 161 F. Supp. 269 (D. Alas. 1958)
• Tribes
  • Metlakatla Indian Community*
  • 238 Native Villages and Tribes

California – 107

• Legislation
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22 (repealing Ch. 604, P.L. 81-322, Oct. 5, 1949; 63 Stat. 705, which had granted the state civil and criminal jurisdiction over the Agua Caliente Reservation)
  • 61 Fed. Reg. 1779 (1996) (approving reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Washoe Tribe over certain Indian Child Welfare Act matters)
• Case Law
  • Jeffredo v. Macarro, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 28180 (9th Cir. Dec. 22, 2009)
  • R.R. v. Superior Court, 180 Cal. App. 4th 185 (Cal. App. 3d Dist. 2009)
  • Barona Band of Mission Indians v. Yee, 528 F.3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2008)
  • Ameriloan v. Superior Court, 169 Cal. App. 4th 81 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2008)
  • Alvarado v. Table Mt. Rancheria, 509 F.3d 1008 (9th Cir. 2007)
  • Sonoma County Fire Chief v. Dry Creek Rancheria Band of Pomo Indians (In re Sonoma County Fire Chief's Application), 228 Fed. Appx. 671 (9th Cir. 2007)
  • Lawrence v. Barona Valley Ranch Resort & Casino, 153 Cal. App. 4th 1364 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. 2007)
  • All Mission Indian Hous. Auth. v. Magante, 526 F. Supp. 2d 1112 (S.D. Cal. 2007)
  • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Superior Court, 40 Cal. 4th 239 (Cal. 2006)
  • In re M.A., 137 Cal. App. 4th 567 (Cal. App. 3d Dist. 2006) 2006 Cal. AG LEXIS 2 (Cal. AG 2006)
  • Doe v. Mann, 415 F.3d 1038 (9th Cir. 2005)
  • Lamere v. Superior Court, 31 Cal. Rptr. 3d 880 (Ct. App. 2005)
  • Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. Smith, 388 F.3d 691 (9th Cir. 2004)
  • Inyo County v. Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Cmty. of the Bishop Colony, 538 U.S. 701 (U.S. 2003)
  • Linneen v. Gila River Indian Cmty., 276 F.3d 489 (9th Cir. 2002)Friends of East Willits Valley v. County of Mendocino, 123 Cal. Rptr.2d 708 (Ct. App.2002)
  • Great Western Casinos, Inc. v. Morongo Band of Mission Indians, 88 Cal. Rptr.2d 828 (Ct. App. 1999)
  • In re Marriage of Purnel, 60 Cal. Rptr.2d 667 (Ct. App. 1997)
  • Round Valley Indian Hous. Auth. v. Hunter, 907 F. Supp. 1343 (N.D. Cal. 1995)
  • Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians v. Workers Comp. App. Bd., 71 Cal. Rptr.2d 105 (Ct. App. 1995)
  • Sycuan Band of Mission Indians v. Roache, 38 F.3d 402 (9th Cir. 1994), amended, 54 F.3d 535 (9th Cir. 1995)
  • People v. Lowry, 34 Cal. Rptr.2d 382 (App. Dep’t Super. Ct. 1994)
  • Quechan Indian Tribe v. McMullen, 984 F.2d 304 (9th Cir. 1993)
  • Hoopa Valley Tribe v. Blue Lake Forest Products, Inc., 143 B.R. 563 (N.D. Cal. 1992), aff’d, 30 F.3d 1138 (9th Cir. 1994)
  • Inland Casino Corp. v. Superior Court, 10 Cal. Rptr.2d 497 (Ct. App. 1992)
  • County of Inyo v. Jeff, 277 Cal. Rptr. 841 (Ct. App. 1991)
  • Boisclair v. Superior Court, 801 P.2d 305 (Cal. 1990)
  • California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987)
  • Segundo v. City of Rancho Mirage, 813 F.2d 1387 (9th Cir. 1987)
  • All Mission Indian Hous. Auth. v. Silvas, 680 F. Supp. 330 (C.D. Cal. 1987)
  • Zachary v. Wilk, 219 Cal. Rptr. 122 (Ct. App. 1985)
  • Rice v. Rehner, 463 U.S. 713 (1983)
  • United States v. County of Humboldt, 615 F.2d 1260 (9th Cir. 1980)
  • In re Humboldt Fir., Inc., 426 F. Supp. 292 (N.D. Cal 1977), aff’d, 625 F.2d 330 (9th Cir. 1980)
  • Santa Rosa Band of Indians v. Kings County, 532 F.2d 655 (9th Cir. 1977)
  • In re Carmen, 48 Cal. 2d 851, 313 P.2d 817 (1957)
• Tribes
  • Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians
  • Alturas Indian Rancheria
  • Augustine Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Barona Group of Capitan Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Bear River Band of Rohnerville Rancheria
  • Berry Creek Rancheria of Maidu Indians
  • Big Lagoon Rancheria
  • Big Pine Band of Owens Valley Paiute Shoshone Indians
  • Big Sandy Rancheria of Mono Indians
  • Big Valley Band of Pomo Indians
  • Blue Lake Rancheria*
  • Bridgeport Paiute Indian Colony
  • Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
  • Cabazon Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Cachil Delte Band of Wintun Indians
  • Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians
  • Cahto Indian Tribe of the Laytonville Rancheria
  • California Valley Miwok Tribe
  • Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Capitan Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Cedarville Rancheria
  • Chemehuevi Indian Tribe*
  • Cher-Ae Heights Indian Community
  • Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
  • Cloverdale Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Cold Springs Rancheria of Mono Indians
  • Colorado River Indian Tribes (also in AZ)*
  • Cortina Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians
  • Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians
  • Cuyapaipe Community of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Death Valley Timbi-Sha Shoshone Band
  • Dry Creek Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Elem Indian Colony of Pomo Indians
  • Elk Valley Rancheria
  • Enterprise Rancheria of Maidu Indians
  • Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria
  • Fort Bidwell Indian Community
  • Fort Independence Indian Community of Paiute Indians
  • Fort Mojave Indian Tribe (also in AZ)*
  • Greenville Rancheria of Maidu Indians
  • Grindstone Indian Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki Indians
  • Guidiville Rancheria
  • Hoopa Valley Tribe*
  • Hopland Band of Pomo Indians*
  • Inaja Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Ione Band of Miwok
  • Jackson Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
  • Jamul Indian Village*
  • Karuk Tribe*
  • Kashia Band of Pomo Indians
  • La Jolla Band of Luiseno Mission Indians*
  • La Posta Band of Diegueno Mission Indians
  • Lower Lake Rancheria
  • Los Coyotes Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians*
  • Lytton Rancheria
  • Manchester Band of Pomo Indians
  • Manzanita Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Mechoopda Indian Tribe
  • Mesa Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Middletown Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians
  • Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Northfork Rancheria of Mono Indians
  • Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Bishop Community
  • Paiute-Shoshone Indians of the Lone Pine Community
  • Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians*
  • Paskenta Band of Nomlake Indians
  • Pauma Band of Luiseno Mission Indians*
  • Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians
  • Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians
  • Pinoleville Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Pit River Tribe
  • Potter Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Quartz Valley Indian Community
  • Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Redding Rancheria*
  • Redwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Resighini Rancheria
  • Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians*
  • Robinson Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Round Valley Indian Tribes
  • Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians
  • San Manuel Band of Serrano Mission Indians*
  • San Pasqual Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Santa Rosa Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Santa Rosa-Tachi Yokut Tribe
  • Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians
  • Santa Ysabel Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians
  • Sherwood Valley Rancheria of Pomo Indians
  • Shingle Springs Band of Miwok Indians
  • Smith River Rancheria*
  • Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians
  • Susanville Indian Rancheria
  • Sycuan Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Table Bluff Reservation
  • Table Mountain Rancheria
  • Torres-Martinez Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians
  • Tule River Indian Tribe
  • Tuolumne Band of Me-Wuk Indians
  • Twenty-Nine Palms Band of Mission Indians
  • United Auburn Indian Community
  • Upper Lake Band of Pomo Indians
  • Utu Utu Gwaitu Paiute Tribe
  • Viejas Group of Bapitan Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Indians*
  • Washoe Tribe (also in NV) (reassumed exclusive ICWA jurisdiction)*
  • Yurok Tribe*

Minnesota – 11

• Legislation
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22 (excluding Red Lake Reservation from state jurisdiction under the Act)
  • 40 Fed. Reg. 4026 (1975) (accepting retrocession of state jurisdiction over the Bois Forte (Nett Lake) Reservation
• Case Law
  • State v. Davis, 773 N.W.2d 66 (Minn. 2009)
  • State v. Roy, 761 N.W.2d 883 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009)
  • Morgan v. 2000 Volkswagen, 754 N.W.2d 587 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008)
  • State v. Losh, 755 N.W.2d 736 (Minn. 2008)
  • State v. Jones, 729 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 2007)
  • In re Civ. Commitment of Beaulieu, 737 N.W.2d 231 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007)
  • State v. Mannypenny, 682 N.W.2d 143 (Minn. 2004)
  • State v. Busse, 644 N.W.2d 79 (Minn. 2002)
  • Minnesota v. R.M.H., 617 N.W.2d 55 (Minn. 2000)
  • Lemke v. Brooks, 614 N.W.2d 242 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000)
  • State v. Johnson, 598 N.W.2d 680 (Minn. 1999)
  • State v. Couture, 587 N.W.2d 849 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999)
  • Cass County v. Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Indians, 524 U.S. 103 (1998)
  • United States v. Wadena, 152 F.3d 831 (8th Cir. 1998)
  • Minnesota Chippewa Tribal Hous. Auth. v. Reese, 978 F.Supp. 1258 (D. Minn. 1997)
  • State v. Stone, 572 N.W.2d 725 (Minn. 1997)
  • State v. Robinson, 572 N.W.2d 720 (1997)
  • Matsch v. Prairie Island Indian Community, 567 N.W.2d 276 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997)
  • State v. St. Clair, 560 N.W.2d 732 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997)
  • Gayle v. Little Six, Inc., 555 N.W.2d 284 (Minn. 1996)
  • Cohen v. Little Six, Inc., 543 N.W.2d 376 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996)
  • Becker County Welfare Dep’t v. Bellcourt, 453 N.W.2d 543 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990)
  • Tibbetts v. Leech Lake Reservation Business Committee, 397 N.W.2d 883 (Minn. 1986)
  • State v. Folstrom, 331 N.W.2d 231 (Minn. 1983)
  • State v. Keezer, 292 N.W.2d 714 (Minn. 1980)
  • State v. Clark, 282 N.W.2d 902 (Minn. 1979)
  • State v. Forge, 262 N.W.2d 341 (Minn. 1977)
  • Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976)
  • Leech Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. Herist, 334 F. Supp. 1001 (D. Minn. 1971)
  • State v. Holthusen 133 N.W.2d 180 (Minn. 1962)
• Tribes
  • Bois Forte (Nett Lake) Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe (retroceded)*
  • Fond du Lac Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe*
  • Grand Portage Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe*
  • Leech Lake Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe*
  • Lower Sioux Indian Community*
  • Mille Lacs Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe*
  • Prairie Island Indian Community*
  • Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians (excluded from Public Law 280)*
  • Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community*
  • Upper Sioux Community*
  • White Earth Band of Minnesota Chippewa Tribe*

Nebraska – 6

• Legislation
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22
  • Act of Oct. 31, 1990, P.L. 101-484, § 2, 104 Stat. 1167, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 983 et seq. (rerecognizing Ponca Tribe of Nebraska, which had been terminated in 1962 pursuant to 25 U.S.C. §§ 971-980)
  • 71 Fed. Reg. 7,994 (2006) (retroceding jurisdiction over Santee Sioux Tribe)
  • 51 Fed. Reg. 24,234 (1986) (retroceding criminal jurisdiction over Winnebago Tribe)
  • 35 Fed. Reg. 16,598 (1970) (retroceding jurisdiction over Omaha Tribe, except traffic)
  • 47 Fed. Reg. 17,337 (1982) (Winnebago reassumption of exclusive ICWA jurisdiction)
• Case Law
  • State v. Wabashaw, 274 Neb. 394 (2007)
  • Miodowski v. Miodowski, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89590 (D. Neb. 2006)
  • Freemont v. United States, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2145 (D. Neb. 2002)
  • United States v. Merrick, 767 F. Supp. 1022 (D. Neb. 1991)
  • Walker v. Rushing, 898 F.2d 672 (8th Cir. 1990)
  • Tyndall v. Gunter, 681 F. Supp. 641 (D. Neb. 1987), aff’d, 840 F.2d 716 (8th Cir. 1988)
  • Op. Att’y Gen. Neb. No. 48 (1985)
  • Omaha Tribe of Nebraska v. Village of Walthill, 334 F. Supp. 823 (D. Neb. 1971), aff’d, 460 F.2d 1327 (8th Cir. 1972)
  • Robinson v. Sigler, 187 N.W.2d 756 (Neb. 1971), on habeas review, Robinson v. Wolff, 349 F. Supp. 514 (D. Neb. 1972)
• Tribes
  • Iowa Tribe (also in KS)*
  • Omaha Tribe (retroceded)*
  • Ponca Tribe
  • Sac & Fox Nation of Missouri (also in KS)
  • Santee Sioux Tribe (retroceded)*
  • Winnebago Tribe (retroceded)*

Oregon – 10

• Legislation
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22 (excluding Warm Springs Reservation from state jurisdiction under the Act)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 715d, P.L. 101-42, June 28, 1989, 103 Stat. 91 (restoring Coquille Tribe and authorizing state to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 556e, P.L. 99-398, Aug. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 850 (restoring Klamath Indian Tribe and authorizing state to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 714e, P.L. 98-481, Oct. 17, 1984, 98 Stat. 2250 (restoring Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, & Siuslaw Indians and authorizing the state to assume civil and criminal jurisdiction)
  • 25 U.S. 713f (c)(6), P. L. 98-165, Nov. 22, 1983, 97 Stat. 1064 (restoring Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community and authorizing state to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction). See also P.L. 100-425, Sept. 9, 1988, 102 Stat.1594, as amended, P.L. 100-581, Title II, § 202, Nov. 1, 1988, 102 Stat. 2939.
  • P.L. 97-391, § 2, Dec. 29, 1982, 96 Stat. 11960, as amended, P.L. 100-139, § 5(b), Oct. 26, 2987, 101 Stat. 827, as further amended, P.L. 100-446, Title 1, Sept. 27, 1988
  • 102 Stat. 1794 (recognizing Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians)
  • 46 Fed. Reg. 2195 (1981) (retroceding jurisdiction over Umatilla Reservation)
  • 44 FR 26,129 (1979) (retroceding jurisdiction over Burns Paiute Reservation)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 711(d)(6), P.L. 95-195, Nov. 18, 1977, 91 Stat. 1415 (Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Reservation and authorizing state to exercise civil and criminal jurisdiction)
• Case Law
  • First Specialty Ins. Corp. v. Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Cmty., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 82591 (D. Or. Nov. 2, 2007)
  • State v. Watters, 211 Ore. App. 628, 636 (Or. Ct. App. 2007)
  • Retasket v. Dep't of Revenue, 2007 Ore. Tax LEXIS 110 (Or. T.C. July 12, 2007)
  • Foreman v. Dep't of Revenue, 2005 Ore. Tax LEXIS 111 (Or. T.C. 2005)
  • State v. Jim, 178 Ore. App. 553 (Or. Ct. App. 2002)
  • Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Indians v. Employment Dep't, 995 P.2d 580 (Or. Ct. App. 2000)
  • Spang v. Dep't of Revenue, 16 OTR-MD 166 (Or. T.C. 1999)
  • Chance v. Coquille Indian Tribe, 327 Ore. 318, 963 P.2d 638 (Or. 1998)
  • United States v. Strong, 778 F.2d 1393 (9th Cir. 1985)
  • State v. Smith, 277 Ore. 251, 256, 560 P.2d 1066 (1977)
  • Anderson v. Gladden, 293 F.2d 463 (9th Cir. 1961)
  • Anderson v. Britton, 212 Or. 1, 318 P.2d 291 (1957)
• Tribes
  • Burns Paiute Tribe (retroceded)*
  • Confederated Tribes of the Coos, Lower Umpqua, & Siuslaw Indians
  • Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Community
  • Confederated Tribes of the Siletz Reservation
  • Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Reservation (retroceded)*
  • Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation (excluded from Public Law 280)*
  • Coquille Tribe*
  • Cow Creek Band of Umpqua Indians
  • Fort McDermitt Paiute & Shoshone Tribes (also in NV)*
  • Klamath Indian Tribe

Wisconsin – 11 – see below

• Legislation
  • Public Law 280 -- 18 U.S.C. § 1162; 25 U.S.C. 1360, as amended; 25 U.S.C. §§ 1321-22 46 Fed. Reg. 15579 (1981) (approving reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Lac Courte Oreilles Tribe over certain child welfare matters)
  • 41 Fed. Reg. 8516 (1976) (retroceding jurisdiction over Menominee Reservation)
  • 62 Fed. Reg. 1471 (1997) (approving reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Forest County Potawatomi over ICWA matters)
  • 61 Fed. Reg. 1778 (1996) (approving reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Red Cliff  Band over ICWA matters)
• Case Law
  • Wisconsin v. Stockbridge-Munsee Cmty., 554 F.3d 657 (7th Cir. 2009)
  • Nation v. Wis. Dep't of Revenue, 2009 WI 48 (Wis. 2009)
  • Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation, 512 F.3d 921 (7th Cir. Wis. 2008)
  • Oneida Tribe of Indians v. Vill. of Hobart, 542 F. Supp. 2d 908 (E.D. Wis. 2008)
  • Ho-Cak Fed. v. Herrell (In re DeCora), 396 B.R. 222 (W.D. Wis. 2008)
  • State v. Jacobs, 2007 WI App 155 (Wis. Ct. App. 2007)
  • Burgess v. Watters, 467 F.3d 676 (7th Cir. 2006)
  • Teague v. Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians, 665 N.W.2d 899 (Wis. 2003)
  • In re Commitment of Burgess, 665 N.W.2d 124 (Wis. 2003)
  • State v. Cutler, 527 N.W.2d 400 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994)
  • St. Germaine v. Chapman, 505 N.W.2d 450 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994)
  • St. Germaine v. Circuit Court for Vilas County, 938 F.2d 75 (7th Cir. 1991)
  • Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Wisconsin, 770 F. Supp.480 (W.D. Wis. 1991), appeal dismissed, 957 F.2d 515 (7th Cir. 1992)
  • Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Wisconsin, 743 F. Supp.645 (W.D. Wis. 1990)
  • Jacobs v. Jacobs, 405 N.W.2d 668 (Wis. Ct. App. 1987)
  • County of Vilas v. Chapman, 361 N.W.2d 699 (Wis. 1985)
  • State v. Webster, 338 N.W.2d 474 (Wis. 1983)
  • State v. Lemieux, 317 N.W.2d 166 (Wis. Ct. App. 1982), aff’d, 327 N.W. 2d 669 (Wis. 1983) 70 Op. Wis. Att’y Gen. 237 (1981)
• Tribes
  • Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians*
  • Forest County Potawatomi Community*
  • Ho-Chunk Nation*
  • Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians (reassumed exclusive ICWA jurisdiction)*
  • Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians*
  • Menominee Indian Tribe (retroceded)*
  • Oneida Tribe of Indians*
  • Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians*
  • St. Croix Chippewa Indians*
  • Sokaogon Chippewa Community
  • Stockbridge-Munsee Community*

Group 3 – Optional Assertion of Public Law 280 Jurisdiction

Florida – 2

• Legislation
  • Fl. Stat. Ann. § 285.16 (Laws 1961, c. 61-252, §§ 1, 2, assuming state civil and criminal jurisdiction under Public Law 280, and authorizing tribal councils to employ personnel to exercise law enforcement powers)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 1741 et seq., P.L. 97-399, § 7, Dec. 31, 1982, 96 Stat. 2015 (especially 1746, addressing lease of Miccosukee lands)
• Case Law
  • Seminole Tribe v. McCor, 903 So.2d 353 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
  • Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. Napoleoni, 890 So.2d 1152 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)
  • Cupo v. Seminole Tribe of Fla., 860 So.2d 1078 (Fla. Dist, Ct. App. 2003)
  • Lewis v. Edwards, 815 So. 2d 656 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
  • Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Houghtaling, 589 So.2d 103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991), aff’d sub nom.
  • Houghtaling v. Seminole Tribe of Florida, 611 So.2d 1235 (Fla. (1993)
  • State v. Billie, 497 So.2d 889 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
  • Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Butterworth, 658 F.2d 310 (5th Cir. 1981)
• Tribes
  • Miccosukee Tribe of Indians*
  • Seminole Tribe (Dania, Big Cypress, and Brighton Reservations)

Idaho – 4

• Idaho Const. of 1890, art. 21, § 19
  • Idaho Code §§ 67-5101 to 67-5103 (1963, Ch. 58, § 1, p. 224, asserting jurisdiction over 7 subject areas: a) compulsory school attendance; b) juvenile delinquency and youth rehabilitation; c) dependent, neglected, and abused children; d) insanities and mental illness; e) public assistance; f) domestic relations; g) operation and management of motor vehicles upon highways and roads maintained by the city or state, or political subdivision thereof; and full jurisdiction with tribe’s consent)
• Case Law
  • State v. Maybee, 2010 Ida. LEXIS 4 (Idaho 2010)
  • Idaho v. Native Wholesale Supply Co., 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28688 (D. Idaho 2009)
  • State v. Beasley, 146 Idaho 594 (Idaho Ct. App. 2008)
  • Marek v. Avista Corp., 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9505 (D. Idaho 2006)
  • State v. Ambro, 142 Idaho 77 (Idaho Ct. App. 2005)
  • State v. Barros, 957 P.2d 1095 (Idaho 1998)
  • State v. George, 906 P.2d 133 (Idaho 1995)
  • State v. Snyder, 807 P.2d 55 (Idaho 1991)
  • State v. Marek, 777 P.2d 1253 (Idaho 1989)
  • State v. Fanning, 759 P.2d 937 (Idaho App. 1988)
  • State v. Major, 725 P.2d 115 (Idaho 1986)
  • Sheppard v. Sheppard, 655 P.2d 895 (Idaho 1982)
  • State v. Allan, 607 P.2d 426 (Idaho 1980)
  • Boyer v. Shoshone-Bannock Indian Tribes, 441 P.2d 167 (Idaho 1988)
• Tribes
  • Coeur D’Alene Tribe*
  • Kootenai Tribe*
  • Nez Perce Tribe*
  • Shoshone-Bannock Tribes*

Washington – 29 – see below

• Legislation
  • Wash. Const. art. XXVI, § 2
  • Wash. Rev. Code §§ 37.12.010 to 37.12.070 (Wash. Laws 1957, ch. 240 § 1, amended,
  • Wash. Laws 1963 ch. 36 § 1 & Supp. 1971) (accepting Public Law 280 jurisdiction over 8 subject areas, over non-trust lands, and over non-Indians without regard to tribal consent, and full jurisdiction over all of Indian country with tribal consent; ten tribes consented to jurisdiction, but six of those later retroceded; in addition, one other tribe has retroceded)
  • 65 Fed. Reg. 75,948 (2000) (retroceding partial jurisdiction over Tulalip Reservation)
  • 54 Fed. Reg. 19, 959 (1989) (retroceding partial jurisdiction over the Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation, Quileute Reservation, and the Swinomish Indian Community)
  • 52 Fed. Reg. 8,372 (1987) (retroceding partial jurisdiction over Colville Reservation)
  • 45 Fed. Reg. 56,450 (1980) (accepting reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Colville Tribe over certain Indian child welfare matters)
  • 45 Fed. Reg. 49,363 (1980) (accepting reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Muckleshoot Tribe over certain Indian child welfare matters)
  • 45 Fed Reg. 47, 926 (1980) (accepting reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Spokane Tribe over certain Indian child welfare matters)
  • 45 Fed. Reg. 56,540 (1980) (accepting reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction by Yakima Nation over certain Indian child welfare matters)
  • 37 Fed. Reg. 7,353 (1972) (retroceding partial jurisdiction over Suquamish/Port Madison Reservation)
  • 34 Fed. Reg. 14,288 (1969) (retroceding partial jurisdiction over Quinault Reservation)
• Case Law
  • State v. Eriksen, 166 Wn.2d 953 (Wash. 2009)
  • Martinez v. Martinez, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 104300 (W.D. Wash. 2008)
  • State v. Pink, 144 Wn. App. 945 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008)
  • United States v. Smiskin, 487 F.3d 1260 (9th Cir. Wash. 2007)
  • Wright v. Colville Tribal Enter. Corp., 159 Wn.2d 108 (Wash. 2006)
  • Skokomish Indian Tribe v. United States, 410 F.3d 506 (9th Cir. 2005)
  • State v. Moses, 37 P.3d 1216 (Wash. 2002)
  • Cordova v. Holwegner, 971 P.2d 531 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999)
  • Landauer v. Landauer, 975 P.2d 577 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999)
  • State v. Squally, 937 P.2d 1069 (Wash. 1997)
  • State v. Cooper, 928 P.2d 406 (Wash. 1996)
  • Estate of Millie Cross v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 891 P.2d 26 (Wash. 1995)
  • County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation, 502 U.S. 251 (1992)
  • McCrea v. Denison, 885 P.2d 856 (Wash. Ct. App. 1994)
  • State v. Schmuck, 850 P.2d 1332 (Wash. 1993)
  • Craig v. James, 19 Indian L. Rep. 3111 (USDC, E.D. Wash. 1992)
  • Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation v. Washington, 938 F.3d 146 (9th Cir. 1991)
  • State v. Hoffman, 804 P.2d 577 (Mont. 1991)
  • Brendale v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of Yakima Indian Nation, 492 U.S. 408 (1989)
  • United States v. Farris, 624 F.2d 890 (9th Cir. 1980)
  • Confederated Bands and Tribes of the Yakima Indian Nation v. Washington, 439 U.S. 463 (1979)
  • Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation v. Beck, 6 Indian L. Rep. F8 (USDC E.D. Wash. 1979)
  • United States v. Marcyes, 557 F.2d 1361 (9th Cir. 1977)
  • Tonasket v. State, 488 P.2d 281 (1971)
  • Makah Indian Tribe v. State of Washington, 457 P.2d 590 (Wash. 1969)
  • Quinault Tribe v. Gallagher, 368 F.2d 648 (9th Cir. 1966)
  • State v. McCoy, 387 P.2d 942 (Wash. 1963)
  • Arquette v. Schneckloth, 346 P.2d 658 (Mont. 1960)
  • Wesley v. Schneckloth, 346 P.2d 658 (Wash. 1959)
  • State v. Paul, 337 P.2d 33 (Mont. 1959)
• Tribes
  • Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation (partial retrocession)*
  • Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (partial retrocession and reassumption of ICWA exclusive jurisdiction)*
  • Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation*
  • Cowlitz Indian Tribe*
  • Hoh Indian Tribe*
  • Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe*
  • Kalispel Indian Community*
  • Lower Elwha Tribal Community*
  • Lummi Tribe*
  • Makah Indian Tribe*
  • Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (reassusmption of ICWA exclusive jurisdiction)*
  • Nisqually Indian Tribe*
  • Nooksack Indian Tribe*
  • Port Gamble Indian Community*
  • Puyallup Tribe*
  • Quileute Tribe (partial retrocession)*
  • Quinault Tribe (partial retrocession)*
  • Samish Indian Tribe
  • Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe*
  • Shoalwater Bay Tribe*
  • Snoqualmie Tribe*
  • Skokomish Indian Tribe*
  • Spokane Tribe (reassumption of ICWA exclusive jurisdiction)*
  • Squaxin Island Tribe*
  • Stillaguamish Tribe*
  • Suquamish Indian Tribe (partial retrocession)*
  • Swinomish Indians (partial retrocession)*
  • Tulalip Tribes (partial retrocession)*
  • Upper Skagit Indian Tribe*

Group 4 – Other Federal Acts Conferring Jurisdiction on States

Colorado – 2

• Legislation
  • P.L. 98-290, §§ 1-5, 98 Stat. 201, 202 (May 21, 1984) (authorizing Town of Ignacio to exercise jurisdiction over Southern Ute Tribe)
• Case Law
  • Wopsock v. Natchees, 279 Fed. Appx. 679 (10th Cir. 2008)
  • United States v. Burch, 169 F.3d 666 (10th Cir. 1999)
  • People v. Morgan, 785 P.2d 1294 (Colo. 1990)
• Tribes
  • Southern Ute Indian Tribe*
  • Ute Mountain Tribe (also in NM & UT)#

Connecticut – 2

• Legislation
  • Mashantucket Pequot Indian Land Claims Settlement Act, P.L. 98-134, Oct. 18, 1983, 97 Stat. 855, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1751 et seq. (conferring state civil and criminal jurisdiction)
  • Mohegan Nation of Connecticut Land Claims Settlement Act, P. L. 103–377, § 2, Oct. 19, 1994, 108 Stat. 3501, codified at, 25 U.S.C. § 1775 et seq. (conferring state civil and criminal jurisdiction)
• Case Law
  • Beecher v. Mohegan Tribe of Indians, 282 Conn. 130 (Conn. 2007)
  • Colebut v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Nation Tribal Elders Council, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8035 (D. Conn. 2007)
  • Dark-Eyes v. Comm'r of Revenue Servs., 276 Conn. 559 (Conn. 2006)
  • Davidson v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming Auth., 97 Conn. App. 146 (Conn. App. Ct. 2006)
  • Connecticut ex rel. Blumenthal v. Babbitt, 26 F. Supp. 2d 397 (D. Conn. 1998)
  • Drumm v. Brown, 716 A.2d 50 (Conn. 1998)
  • Charles v. Charles, 701 A.2d 650 (Conn. 1997)
  • State v. Spears, 662 A.2d 80 (Conn. 1995)
  • Campbell v. Mashantucket Pequot Tribal Council, 1991 WL 40031 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1991)
  • Schaghticoke Indians of Kent, Conn., Inc. v. Potter, 587 A.2d 139 (Conn. Ct. of App. 1991)
• Tribes
  • Mashantucket Pequot Tribe*
  • Mohegan Indian Tribe*

Iowa – 1

• Legislation
  • Act of June 30, 1948, 62 Stat. 1161 (conferring state criminal jurisdiction over reservation)
  • Iowa Code Ann. §§ 1.12 -1.14 (62 G.A. Ch. 79, § 1, eff. July 1, 1967, accepting civil jurisdiction over reservation pursuant to Public Law 280)
• Case Law
  • In the Interest of N.V., 744 N.W.2d 634 (Iowa 2008)
  • United States v. Papakee, 485 F. Supp. 2d 1032 (N.D. Iowa 2007)
  • Sac & Fox Tribe of the Miss. v. BIA, 439 F.3d 832 (8th Cir. 2006)
  • State v. Lasley, 705 N.W.2d 481 (Iowa 2005)
  • Gross v. Omaha Tribe of Nebraska, 601 N.W.2d 82 (Iowa 1999)
  • Meier v. Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa, 476 N.W.2d 61 (Iowa 1991)
  • State v. Bear, 452 N.W.2d 430 (1990)
  • State Dep’t of Human Services v. Whitebreast, 409 N.W.2d 460 (Iowa 1987)
  • Youngbear v. Brewer, 415 F. Supp. 807 (N.D. Iowa 1976), aff’d, 549 F.2d 74 (8th Cir. 1977)
• Tribes
  • Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi (Meskwaki)*

Kansas – 4

• Legislation
  • 18 U.S.C. § 3243 (ch. 645, 62 Stat. 827, June 25, 1948, recodifying 25 U.S.C. § 217a, 54 Stat. 249, June 8, 1940, and conferring state criminal jurisdiction over reservations)
• Case Law
  • In re A.J.S., 288 Kan. 429 (Kan. 2009)
  • Governor of Kan. v. Kempthorne, 516 F.3d 833 (10th Cir. 2008)
  • Cornelius v. Kan. Dep't of Revenue DMV, 39 Kan. App. 2d 334 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008)
  • Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation v. Wagnon, 476 F.3d 818 (10th Cir. 2007)
  • Winnebago Tribe of Neb. v. Kline, 283 Kan. 64 (Kan. 2007)
  • Wyandotte Nation v. Sebelius, 443 F.3d 1247 (10th Cir. 2006)
  • Wagnon v. Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation, 546 U.S. 1072 (2005)
  • Shawnee Tribe v. United States, 423 F.3d 1204 (10th Cir. 2005)
  • Oyler v. Allenbrand, 23 F.3d 292 (10th Cir. 1994)
  • Negonsott v. Samuels, 507 U.S. 99 (1993)
  • State v. Nioce, 716 P.2d 585 (Kan. 1986)
  • Iowa Tribe of Indians of Kansas and Nebraska v. State of Kansas, 787 F.2d 1434 (10th Cir. 1986)
  • State v. Mitchell, 642 P.2d 981 (Kan. 1982)
• Tribes
  • Iowa Tribe (also in NB)*
  • Kickapoo Tribe of Indians*
  • Prairie Band of Potawatomi Nation*
  • Sac & Fox Nation (also in NB)

Maine – 4

• Legislation
  • Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, 25 U.S.C. § 1721 et seq. (state civil and criminal jurisdiction conferred by § 1725(b)(1), (f), and (h); child welfare jurisdiction addressed in 1727(e))
  • Aroostook Band of Micmancs Settlement Act, P.L. 102-171, 105 Stat. 1143, Nov. 26, 1991 (conferring state civil and criminal jurisdiction)
  • 47 Fed. Reg. 3414 (1982) (reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction under ICWA by Passamaquoddy Tribe)
  • 47 Fed. Reg. 27397 (1981) (reassumption of exclusive jurisdiction under ICWA by Penobscot Tribe)
• Case Law
  • Francis v. Dana-Cummings, 2008 ME 184 (Me. 2008)
  • HHS v. Maybee, 2009 ME 15 (Me. 2009)
  • Maine v. Johnson, 498 F.3d 37 (1st Cir. 2007)
  • Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians v. Ryan, 484 F.3d 73 (1st Cir. 2007)
  • Aroostook Band of Micmacs v. Ryan, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72452 (D. Me. 2007)
  • Aroostook Band of Micmacs v. Ryan, 484 F.3d 41 (1st Cir. 2007)
  • Penobscot Nation v. Georgia-Pacific Corp., 254 F.3d 317 (1st Cir. 2001)
  • Great Northern Paper, Inc. v. Penobscot Nation, 770 A.2d 574 (Me. 2001)
  • Penobscot Nation v. Fellencer, 164 F.3d 706 (1st Cir. 1999)
  • Boudman v. Aroostook Band of Micmac Indians, 54 F. Supp. 2d 44 (D. Me. 1999)
  • Shannon v. Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, 54 F. Supp. 2d 35 (D. Me. 1999)
  • Francis v. Pleasant Point Passamaquoddy Hous. Auth., 740 A.2d 575 (Me. 1999)
  • Akins v. Penobscot Nation, 130 F.3d 482, 484-85 (1st Cir. 1997)
  • Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians v. Maine Human Rights Commission, 960 F. Supp. 449 (D. Me. 1997)
  • Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Maine, 75 F.3d 784, 787 (1st Cir. 1996)
  • Penobscot Nation v. Stilphen, 461 A.2d 478 (Me. 1983)
  • State v. Dana, 404 A.2d 551 (Me. 1979)
  • Bottomly v. Passamaquoddy Tribe, 599 F.2d 1061, 1064-65 (1st Cir. 1979)
• Tribes
  • Aroostook Band of Micmac Indians
  • Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians
  • Passamaquoddy Tribe*
  • Penobscot Tribe*

Massachusetts – 1

• Legislation
  • Massachusetts Indian Land Claims Settlement Act, P.L. 100-95, 101 Stat. 704, Aug. 18, 1987, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1771 et seq. (§§ 1771e and 1771g address state civil and criminal jurisdiction)
• Case Law
  • Wiener v. Wampanoag Aquinnah Shellfish Hatchery Corp., 223 F. Supp. 2d 346 (D. Mass. 2002)
  • Wampanoag Tribe of Gayhead v. Massachusetts Commission against Discrimination, 63 F. Supp.2d 119 (D. Mass 1999)
  • James v. Wampanoag Tribal Council, 499 N.E.2d 1213 (Mass. App. Ct. 1986)
• Tribe
  • Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head

New York – 7

• Legislation
  • 25 U.S.C. § 232 (ch. 809, 62 Stat. 1224, Apr. 2, 1948, conferring state criminal jurisdiction over all reservations in the state)
  • 25 U.S.C. § 233 (ch. 947, 64 Stat. 845, Sept. 13, 1950, conferring state civil jurisdiction over all reservations in the state)
• Case Law
  • City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation, 125 S. Ct. 1478 (2005)
  • Clinton v. Hill, 772 N.Y.S.2d 634 (App. Div. 2004)
  • Bowen v. Doyle, 880 F. Supp. 99 (W.D.N.Y. 1995), aff’d, 230 F.2d 525 (2d Cir. 2000)
  • Dep’t of Taxation & Finance of N.Y. v. Milhelm Attea & Bros., Inc., 512 U.S. 61 (1994)
  • United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786 (2d Cir. 1992)
  • United States v. Cook, 922 F.2d 1926 (2d Cir. 1991)
  • United States v. Burns, 725 F. Supp. 116 (N.D.N.Y. 1989)
  • People v. Boots, 434 N.Y.S.2d 850 (N.Y. Co. Ct. 1980)
  • People v. Edwards, 432 N.Y.S.2d 567 (A.Div. 1980)
  • People v. Cook, 365 N.Y.S.2d 611 (Onondaga County Ct. 1975)
  • People v. Redeye, 358 N.Y.S.2d 632 (1974)
  • Bennet v. Fink Construction Co., 262 N.Y.S.2d 331 (Sup. Ct. 1965)
  • People ex rel. Ray v. Martin, 326 U.S. 496 (1946)
• Tribes
  • Cayuga Nation
  • Oneida Indian Nation*
  • Onondaga Nation
  • St. Regis Band of Mohawk Indians*
  • Seneca Nation*
  • Tonawanda Band of Seneca Indians
  • Tuscarora Nation

North Dakota – 1

• Legislation
  • Act of May 31, 1946, 60 Stat. 229 (conferring state criminal jurisdiction over Devil’s Lake, now Spirit Lake, reservation)
• Case Law
  • Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Tribal Court of the Spirit Lake Indian Reservation, 495 F.3d 1017 (8th Cir. 2007)
  • Longie v. Spirit Lake Tribe, 400 F.3d 586 (8th Cir. N.D. 2005)
  • Nelson v. Dubois, 232 N.W.2d 54 (N.D. 1975)
  • Fournier v. Roed, 161 N.W.2d 458 (N.D. 1968)
  • In re Whiteshield, 124 N.W.2d 694 (N.D. 1963)
• Tribes
  • Spirit Lake Tribe*

Rhode Island – 1

• Legislation
  • Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act, P.L. 95-395, § 2, 92 Stat. 813, Sept. 30, 1978, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. (§1708 confers state civil and criminal jurisdiction)
• Case Law
  • Carcieri v. Salazar, 129 S. Ct. 1058 (2009)
  • Thomas v. Rhode Island, 542 F.3d 944 (1st Cir. 2008)
  • Narragansett Indian Tribe v. Rhode Island, 449 F.3d 16 (1st Cir. 2006)
  • In re Advisory Opinion to the House of Representatives (Casino II), 885 A.2d 698 (R.I. 2005)
  • Greene v. Rhode Island, 398 F.3d 45 (1st Cir. 2005)
  • Thomas v. Banfield, 2002 R.I. Super. LEXIS 87 (R.I. Super. Ct. 2002)
  • Ninigret Dev. Corp. v. Narragansett Indian Wetuomuck Hous. Auth., 207 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2000)
  • Narragansett Indian Tribe v. Narragansett Elec. Co., 89 F.3d 908 (1st Cir. 1996)
  • State v. Brown, 1996 R.I. Super. LEXIS 121 (R.I. Super. Ct. 1996)
  • Maynard v. Narragansett Indian Tribe, 984 F.2d 14 (1st Cir. 1993)
• Tribes
  • Narragansett Indian Tribe

South Carolina – 1

• Legislation
  • Catawba Indian Tribe of South Carolina Land Claim Settlement Act, Pub. L. 103–116, § 4(c), Oct. 27, 1993, 107 Stat. 1121, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 941-941m (repealing termination act, 25 U.S.C. § 931 et seq.)
  • S.C. Code §§ 27–16–10 to 27–16–140 (§ 27-16-40 establishing terms of jurisdiction on Catawba reservation)
• Case Law
  • Catawba Indian Tribe v. State, 372 S.C. 519 (S.C. 2007)
  • Wade v. Blue, 369 F.3d 407 (4th Cir. 2004)
  • Catawba Indian Tribe v. City of North Myrtle Beach, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 13987 (4th Cir. 2000) (unpublished)
  • State v. Keesee, 336 S.C. 599, 521 S.E.2d 743 (1999)
• Tribes
  • Catawba Indian Nation

Texas – 3

• Legislation
  • Texas Band of Kickapoo Act, Pub. L. 97–429, § 2, 96 Stat. 2269, Jan. 8, 1983, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1300b-11 (no mention of state jurisdiction)
  • Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas Restoration Act, P.L. 100-89, 101 Stat. 670, Aug. 18, 1987, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 731 et seq. (§ 736f confers state civil and criminal jurisdiction over reservation)
  • Ysleta del Sur Pueblo Restoration Act, P. L. 100–89, title I, § 101, 101 Stat. 666, Aug. 18, 1987, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 1300g et seq. (§ 1300g-3 confers state civil and criminal jurisdiction over reservation
• Case Law
  • Texas v. United States, 497 F.3d 491 (5th Cir. 2007)
  • Pais v. Sinclair, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80553 (W.D. Tex. 2006)
  • Garza v. Traditional Kickapoo Tribe, 79 Fed. Appx. 10 (5th Cir. 2003) (unpublished decision)
  • Alabama-Coushatta Tribes of Texas v. Texas, 208 F. Supp.2d 670 (E.D. Tex. 2002), summarily aff'd, 66 Fed. Appx. 525 (5th Cir. 2003)
  • Bank One, N.A. v. Shumake, 281 F.3d 507, 511 (5th Cir. 2002)
  • Texas v. Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo, 220 F. Supp. 2d 668 (D. Tex. 2002)
  • Comstock Oil & Gas v. Ala. & Coushatta Indian Tribes, 261 F.3d 567 (5th Cir. 2001)
  • Morgan v. Coushatta Tribe of Indians of La., 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25291 (D. Tex. 2001)
  • Silva v. Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo, 28 S.W.3d 122 (Tex. Ct. App. 2000)
  • TTEA v. Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo, 181 F.3d 676 (5th Cir. 1999)
  • Texas v. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, 79 F. Supp.2d 708 (W.D. Tex. 1999), summarily aff'd, 37 F.3d 631 (5th Cir. 2000)
  • Kickapoo Traditional Tribe v. Chacon, 46 F. Supp. 2d 644 (D. Tex. 1999)
  • Holguin v. Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo, 954 S.W.2d 843 (Tex. App. 1997)
  • Yavapai-Apache Tribe v. Mejia, 906 S.W.2d 152 (Tex. App. 1995)
• Tribes
  • Alabama-Coushatta Tribes
  • Kickapoo Traditional Tribe*
  • Ysleta Del Sur Pueblo*

Utah – 1

• Legislation
  • Paiute Restoration Act, P. L. 96–227, § 7, 94 Stat. 320, Apr. 3, 1980, codified at 25 U.S.C. § 761 et seq. (§ 766 confers state civil and criminal jurisdiction over reservation)
• Case Law
  • Shivwits Band of Paiute Indians v. Utah, 428 F.3d 966 (10th Cir. Utah 2005)
• Tribes
  • Paiute Indian Tribe

Footnotes

1 In 1973, Arizona attempted to assume jurisdiction under Public Law 280 over air and water pollution only. Ariz. Rev. Stat. §§ 36-1801, 36-1856 (1973 Supp.). Subsequently, the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976) made it clear that Public Law 280 did not encompass state regulatory jurisdiction of the type that Arizona had attempted to exercise. Arizona has since repealed its laws assuming jurisdiction over air and water pollution. Ariz. Laws 1986, § 19, Subsec. B (1987) (water pollution); Ariz. Laws 2003, § 4 (2003) (air pollution).

2 Nevada assumed optional jurisdiction under Public Law 280 in 1967, amending the provision a few years later to require tribal consent. Nev. Rev. Stat. § 41.430. See also Chapter 601, Statutes of Nevada (1973). A 1973 amendment provided for retrocession except for those tribes already subject to the Act which consented to continued state jurisdiction. No tribes requested continuation of state jurisdiction. In 1975, retrocession was accepted for 15 tribes that had been subjected to state jurisdiction under Public Law 280. 40 Fed. Reg. 27,501 (1975). In 1988, retrocession was offered and accepted for the Ely Colony. 53 F. Reg. 5837 (1988). At present, Nevada does not exercise any jurisdiction under Public Law 280.

3 North Dakota attempted to accept civil jurisdiction under Public Law 280, subject to tribal or individual consent. N.D. Cent. Code §§ 27-19-01 to 27-10-13. Both the condition of individual acceptance and the condition of tribal acceptance have been declared invalid under federal law. Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold Reservation v. Wold Eng’g, 476 U.S. 877 (1986) (tribal acceptance); Nelson v. Dubois, 232 N.W.2d 54 (N.D. 1975) (tribal acceptance).

4 In 1961, South Dakota attempted to assert jurisdiction under Public Law 280 with respect to criminal offenses and civil cause of actions arising on highways. S.D. Codified Laws §§ 1-1-12 to 1-1-21. The Eighth Circuit declared this legislation invalid in 1990. Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, 900 F.2d 1164 (8th Cir. 1990).

5 In 1971, Utah asserted jurisdiction under Public Law 280, subject to tribal consent. Utah Code §§ 63-36-9 to 63-36-21, ch. 169, § 1 (1971). No tribe has consented to jurisdiction under the terms of this law.

6 In Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie, 522 U.S. 520 (1998), the United States Supreme Court removed the Indian country status of most lands held by Alaskan Natives. Since Public Law 280 applies within “Indian country,” that decision left Public Law 280 irrelevant to much of Alaska. However, there are still Native allotments and Native townsites that likely qualify as Indian country, leaving some room for the continued operation of Public Law 280. See Geoffrey D. Strommer & Stephen D. Osborne, “Indian Country” and the Nature and Scope of Tribal Self-Government in Alaska, 22 Alaska L. Rev. 1 (2005).