Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights

Statute

Indian Civil Rights Act

The 1968 Indian Civil Rights Act applied many Bill of Rights protections to tribal governments and tied state jurisdiction to tribal consent.

Citation
Pub. L. 90-284, tit. II-VII, 82 Stat. 73, 77 (Apr. 11, 1968); 25 U.S.C. 1301-1304
Year
1968
Effect on land rights
mixed

What happened

The Indian Civil Rights Act was approved April 11, 1968. Title II, now 25 U.S.C. 1302, bars an Indian tribe "in exercising powers of self-government" from violating a list of protections, such as unreasonable searches, double jeopardy and denial of equal protection or due process. It does not include everything in the Bill of Rights. The Supreme Court noted in Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez (1978) that "the statute does not prohibit the establishment of religion, nor does it require jury trials in civil cases."

Original Section 202 capped tribal criminal punishment at six months or $500. The 1986 amendment raised it to one year and $5,000, and a 2010 law lets tribal courts impose up to three years or $15,000 for certain defendants. Section 203 extends the writ of habeas corpus to test "the legality of his detention by order of an Indian tribe."

Title IV changed how states could take over criminal and civil jurisdiction in Indian country. States could assume it only "with the consent of the Indian tribe occupying the particular Indian country." The same title repealed section 7 of the 1953 Act (Public Law 280), though earlier cessions of jurisdiction under that section were not affected.

In Santa Clara Pueblo the Court held that the Act's only express remedy is habeas corpus and that tribal sovereign immunity bars suits against the tribe under it. It reasoned that Congress was committed to tribal self-determination.

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

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Well supported by the sources below.

  1. to test the legality of his detention by order of an Indian tribeIndian Civil Rights Act, Pub. L. 90-284, Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 73 (Statutes at Large), govinfo.gov
  2. with the consent of the Indian tribe occupying the particular Indian countryIndian Civil Rights Act, Pub. L. 90-284, Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 73 (Statutes at Large), govinfo.gov
  3. for a term of six months or a fine of $500, or both25 U.S. Code sec. 1302, Cornell LII
  4. the statute does not prohibit the establishment of religion, nor does it require jury trials in civil casesSanta Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978), Cornell LII
  5. Suits against the tribe under the ICRA are barred by the tribe's sovereign immunity from suitSanta Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49 (1978), Cornell LII

Research notes. The 1968 Statutes at Large scan has poor text recognition in Title II, so the original six-months-or-$500 cap was confirmed from the Cornell U.S. Code amendment notes rather than from the scan itself. Santa Clara Pueblo addresses federal civil suits; tribal-court practice under the Act was not reviewed.

Who is doing the work

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Doctrine applied 3

Policy era 1

Sources

  1. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Civil_Rights_Actpointer
Kind
Statute
Confidence
High

Correct this record