state jurisdiction

What happened

The question is when a state's laws and courts reach into Indian country, the land within and around reservations. Three decisions mark the arc.

Worcester v. Georgia (1832) arose after Georgia extended its laws over Cherokee territory. Samuel Worcester, a white missionary licensed by the federal government, was convicted in a Georgia court for residing in the Cherokee nation without a state license. Chief Justice Marshall held that Georgia's assertion of power was invalid, writing that the Cherokee nation is a distinct community in which the laws of Georgia can have no force.

In Williams v. Lee (1959), a non-Indian storekeeper sued a Navajo couple in Arizona state court over goods bought on credit at his store on the Navajo Reservation. The Court reversed. It said allowing state jurisdiction would undermine tribal courts and infringe the right of the Indians to govern themselves, and that any change was for Congress. The test it described: whether state action infringed on the right of reservation Indians to make their own laws and be ruled by them.

Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta (June 29, 2022) came after McGirt v. Oklahoma held the Creek reservation had never been disestablished. A non-Indian convicted of neglecting an Indian child challenged the state's power to prosecute him. The Court held the federal government and the state have concurrent jurisdiction over crimes by non-Indians against Indians in Indian country, writing that Indian country is part of the State. Federal law can still preempt state jurisdiction in some circumstances.

Summarized with AI assistance from 5 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error