Practice Area:

Tribal Law Enforcement

(Return to Previous Page)

Brad S. Jolly & Associates attorneys have provided assistance to tribal police departments as well as assisted tribes in establishing police departments. We have also represented tribes in the establishment and development of criminal laws and procedures as full exercises of tribal sovereignty. Some of the areas of law enforcement the firm has gained experience in are:

• Drafting of law and order codes establishing police departments
• Drafting codes setting forth crimes and criminal conduct
• Drafting and negotiating mutual aid law enforcement agreements
• Providing opinions to tribal courts on matters of tribal criminal law
• Representing tribal police departments in federal criminal proceedings involving on-reservation crimes under federal jurisdiction
• Providing advise regarding enforcement of criminal laws on-reservation against both Indians and non-Indians

Although sometimes overlooked, tribal law enforcement is a key aspect of tribal sovereignty and self-government. Brad S. Jolly & Associates recognizes this fact and understands the uniqueness of criminal jurisdiction and law enforcement in Indian country. In particular, Brad S. Jolly & Associates consistently maintains an approach in dealing with law enforcement issues that is rooted in deep beliefs in ultimate tribal sovereign authority. In particular, while many seem to approach tribal law enforcement as though it is primarily the function of the federal government and tribes simply exercise criminal jurisdiction when the United States permits it, Brad S. Jolly & Associates recognizes the disrespectful and incorrect interpretation of tribal authority and Indian law such attitudes represent. While the United States has enacted many laws affecting tribal criminal jurisdiction, it is always the starting point that tribes are vested with full criminal jurisdiction within their territory which may have been limited by Congress. But, under all circumstances, the tribe's exercise of criminal jurisdiction is part of its inherent authority, unless it is an extension of that authority through a delegation of federal power through an act of Congress. Tribal criminal authority is not a matter of "permission" from the United States and when the federal government exercises criminal jurisdiction within Indian country, it is a separate exercise of jurisdiction not related to the tribe's authority.

(Return to Previous Page)

INDIAN LAW UPDATES

Senate Confirms Artman as ASIA

The Senate officially confirmed Carl Artman as the new Assistant Secretary Indian Affairs by a vote of 87-1. Only Senator David Vitter (R-LA), who is a strong critic of the BIA and off-reservation gaming,... more »

Governor Richardson Would Create Cabinet Secretary for Indian Affairs

In an interview with Indian Country Today, Democratic Presidential Candidate Bill Richardson, currently in his second term as governor of New Mexico, said, "If I'm elected president, I would propose... more »

Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Superior Court, Cal. S.Ct. (Dec. 21, 2006)

In a 4-3 split decision, the California Supreme Court upheld the California Court of Appeals decision that Indian tribes do not have sovereign immunity against suits seeking to enforce state campaign contribution... more »

NIGC Case Involves Greater Issues than MICS Authority

The D.C. Circuit's decision holding that the NIGC lacks authority to fully regulate class III gaming involves a lot more than the limited issue raised in the litigation and determined by the courts. It... more »