Title: McGirt v. Oklahoma points to why Native Americans have a hard time seeking justice - The Washington Post
Headings: The Oklahoma decision reveals why Native Americans have a hard time seeking justice
The Oklahoma decision reveals why Native Americans have a hard time seeking justice
Congress won’t let tribes fully punish non-Native American criminals — but federal prosecutors often won’t pursue crimes against Native Americans.
McGirt v. Oklahoma
Why does the federal government share jurisdiction with the tribal nations?
What are the consequences of federal jurisdiction?
What can be done?

Content: Here's what you need to know about this new identity. In the past decade, Congress partially restored criminal jurisdiction for tribes. The 2010 Tribal Law and Order Act amended the ICRA to give tribes the power to sentence Native American defendants to not just one but up to three years per offense. When Congress reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act in 2013, it restored tribal court authority over non-Native American defendants for crimes related to domestic violence. Some resisted the VAWA changes. For instance, Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said, “So the idea behind [VAWA] is we’ll try them in tribal court. But … it’s going to be made up of Indians, right? So the non-Indian doesn’t get a fair trial. ” In other words, opponents argued tribal jurisdiction over non-Native Americans is unfair, while federal and state jurisdiction over Native Americans is fair. Advertisement
Story continues below advertisement
Both the 2010 act and the 2013 VAWA changes suggest that if policymakers are motivated, more reform is possible, especially during a nationwide debate about correcting past injustices.