Criminal Jurisdiction in Indian Country Essay

government has unspecified and unorganized policies, which were unprotected for Native Americans who lived in the west because of all the new coming Americans. During westward expansion, a majority of who moved were whites, who didn’t know the Native Americans who already lived in the west. The Natives felt their land was being conquered, because of the U.S government policies(Louisana Purchase & Homestead Act) and the whites not wanting them to be there, which lead to fighting between the Natives and the whites. These acts and policies such as the Indian Removal Act often resulted in violated treaties and violence. The Indian Removal Act was the removal of Native American homes and tribes. “This also confines the Indians to still narrower limits, destroys that game which in their normal state, and constitutes their principal means of subsistence.” Resulting in westward expansion, Native Americans began rapidly decreasing in the area by wars and new diseases caught by new coming

Long ago on the great plains, the buffalo roamed and the Native Americans lived amongst each other. They were able to move freely across the lands until the white men came and concentrated them into certain areas. Today there are more than five-hundred different tribes with different beliefs and history. Native Americans still face problems about the horrific history they went through and today 's discrimination. The removal of American Indian tribes is one of the most tragic events in American history. There are many treaties that have been signed by American representatives and people of Indian tribes that guaranteed peace and the values of the Indian territories. The treaties were to assure that fur trade would continue without interruption. The American people wanting Indian land has led to violent conflict between the two. Succeeding treaties usually forced the tribes to give up their land to the United States government. There were laws made for Native American Displacement that didn’t benefit the Native Americans, these laws still have long lasting effects on them today, and there was a huge number of Native Americans killed for many reasons.

“I fought through the civil war and have seen men shot to pieces and slaughtered by thousands, but the Cherokee removal was the cruelest work I ever knew”, remarked a Georgia soldier who had participated in the removal of Indian Natives during the mid-1800’s. As a result of the Indian Removal Act, Indian natives have been perceived as mistreated and cheated throughout history. The Indian Removal Act was passed during the presidency of Andrew Jackson on May 28, 1830. This act granted authorization to the president to exchange unsettled lands west of Mississippi for Indian lands residing in state borders. Initially, the Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed to expand the Southern United State for farmland and to aid the government in furthering our development as a nation. With this plan in mind, the government provided money to establish districts in the west of the Mississippi River for the Indian natives, ensured trade and exchange in those districts, allowed Native Indian tribes to be compensated for the cost of their removal and the improvements of their homesteads, and also pay one years’ worth subsistence to those Native Indians who relocated to the west.

As time went on and European and eventually American influence spread across the country, Tribes began to feel their sovereignty threatned as they could no longer deal with wrongdoers on their land the same way they did in the past. The Federal Government began intrude onto Indian Land. In 1817 the U.S passed the General Crimes Act1, whcih gave the Federal Government jurisdiction in Indian Country when a crime was commited if either the victim or derfendent was a non-Native. Then, in 1885, the U.S passed the Major Crimes Act2 which gave the Federal Government jurisdiction in Indian Country over major crimes, such as murder, when the defendent was a Native.

In Chapter 6, Wilkins discusses how the disclaimer clauses. These clauses keep states from exercising authority on Indian land (180). They are an “important but often overlooked tool in the arsenal available to tribes to assert their own sovereignty against state threats” (177). A specific example of a disclaimer clause is Wisconsin’s territorial disclaimer of 1836 which prohibited territories or states from having any authority on Indian land (180). In Native American Church v. Navajo Tribal Council (1959) it was declared that Indian tribes actually have a higher status than states (179). This was a major victory for Indians in their fight for sovereignty. United States v. Rickert (1903) was also a win for sovereignty in that the Court prohibited South Dakota from taxing Indian land (185).After the verdict in Seminole Tribe v. Florida (1996), the balance of power between state and federal government leaned towards the states. Before this, negotiations with tribes had been conducted at the federal level and not with states (187). This was against the idea of sovereignty because now the states had more power over the tribes and could abuse that power for personal gain.

Although the horrors of the American Civil War and Reconstruction within Indian Territory were fresh. Yet, the presence of Indian Territory changed drastically between 1865 and 1889, because of the “Second Trail of Tears”, the unrest of the Southern Plains tribes of western Indian Territory, and the impact of U.S. Polices on Indian Territory.

Tribal sovereignty is a highly debated concept and an important aspect of Native American society. It refers to a tribe’s power to govern itself, manage its membership, and regulate tribal relations. As Joanna Barker stated, “Sovereignty carries the awful stench of colonization.” Tribal sovereignty must be traced to the beginning of colonization in North America. Colonizing nations asserted sovereignty over indigenous people and took away their independent status. The term “tribal sovereignty” carries with it multiples meanings and implications for tribal nations (Cobb, 2005).

Power can be viewed as the ability to influence and/or control others. Another flaw about reservations is the fact that they are not totally governed by Native American representatives. The U.S. government actually has tight control over the majority, if not all, reservations (Perry, 2002, p 233). This tight control has left the Native American population powerless in terms of self- regulation. Despite the fact that Native American government do exist,

Native Americans have felt distress from societal and governmental interactions for hundreds of years. American Indian protests against these pressures date back to the colonial period. Broken treaties, removal policies, acculturation, and assimilation have scarred the indigenous societies of the United States. These policies and the continued oppression of the native communities produced an atmosphere of heightened tension. Governmental pressure for assimilation and their apparent aim to destroy cultures, communities, and identities through policies gave the native people a reason to fight. The unanticipated consequence was the subsequent creation of a pan-American Indian identity

American Indians and Alaskan Natives have a relationship with the federal government that is unique due to the “trust relationship” between the US and American Indians/Alaskan Natives (AI/ANs) who are entitled to health care services provided by the US government by virtue of their membership in sovereign Indian nations. In order to contextualize the complex nature of Indian health programs it is necessary to become versed in the political and legal status of Indian tribes. Through numerous constitutional, legislative, judicial, executive rulings, and orders that were largely associated with the succession of land and subsequent treaty rights; the health care of AI/ANs has been one of many responsibilities guaranteed by the federal government. The foundations of which can be traced back to the year 1787. The ceded land has been interpreted in courts to mean that healthcare and services were in a sense prepaid by AI/AN tribes and 400 million acres of land. The misconception of “free healthcare” and a conservative political disdain from so called entitlement programs have also led to misconceptions regarding the federal government’s responsibility to provide health care and services to AI/ANs. Rhoades (2000) has argued that tribal sovereignty is the overarching principle guiding Indian health care on a daily basis.1 This paper will examine the history surrounding federally mandated healthcare to AI/ANs, pertinent issues of sovereignty, as well as case studies in tribal

Long ago on the great plains, the buffalo roamed and the Native Americans lived amongst each other. They were able to move freely across the lands until the white men came and concentrated them into certain areas. Today there are more than five-hundred different tribes with different beliefs and history. Native Americans still face problems about the horrific history they went through and today 's discrimination. The removal of American Indian tribes is one of the most tragic events in American history. There are many treaties that have been signed by American representatives and people of Indian tribes that guaranteed peace and the values of the Indian territories. The treaties were to assure that fur trade would continue without interruption. The American people wanting Indian land has led to violent conflict between the two. Succeeding treaties usually forced the tribes to give up their land to the United States government. There were laws made for Native American Displacement that didn’t benefit the Native Americans, these laws still have long lasting effects on them today, and there was a huge number of Native Americans killed for many reasons.

There are about 566 federally recognized tribal governments in the United States. These governments are dependent nations with a nationhood status and inherent powers of self governance. These powers entitle them to their laws as long as these laws are not contrary to the U.S. Constitution. It is because of these laws that sometimes a state police department with jurisdiction bordering a Native American reservation is frustrated while policing. The paper examines the challenges that these state law enforcers face while policing alongside Native Americans.

With the federal government’s support, many Native tribes have constructed Native Governments and Corporations where the rights to land and money are placed to their own responsibility. What this actually means is that the rights of the people’s land and monetary bonds are transferred from governmental trust to

and mediators are involved and the goal is to bring peace, harmony, and healing back to the community to all of the individuals involved. For example, in India, the society is much more communal and family oriented and this is clear when one looks at the traditional justice system used in rural areas to this date. Known as “panchayat” community elders get together and decide on issues that affect the entire community and singular families or individuals. The goal of such community circles involves the peer, family, and victim mediations and other programs that lead to restoring peace and resolving the conflicts (Vincentnathans 2007).

If the news of gang rapes can horrify you then how about watching them on CDs—videos of these horrific incidents recorded by the perpetrators themselves?