7.2 Tribal Court Jurisdiction and the Exhaustion Doctrine

Tribal courts play a crucial role in Native American justice systems. They have broad jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters on tribal lands, but face limits when dealing with non-members. Understanding these boundaries is key to grasping tribal sovereignty and self-governance.

The exhaustion doctrine requires parties to first seek remedies in tribal courts before federal courts. This rule, established by key Supreme Court cases, promotes respect for tribal self-government and minimizes outside interference. It's a vital aspect of tribal court authority and federal-tribal relations.

Tribal Court Jurisdiction

Scope of Tribal Jurisdiction

Top images from around the web for Scope of Tribal Jurisdiction

• 

  The Dual Court System | American Government View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What's tribal sovereignty and what does it mean for Native Americans? View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Dual Court System | American Government View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Scope of Tribal Jurisdiction

• 

  The Dual Court System | American Government View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  What's tribal sovereignty and what does it mean for Native Americans? View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Dual Court System | American Government View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Tribal sovereignty in the United States - Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Tribal sovereignty grants tribes the inherent power to govern their members and territories
• Subject matter jurisdiction refers to a court's authority to hear cases involving specific types of legal issues or claims
  • Tribal courts generally have broad subject matter jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters arising within their territories
• Personal jurisdiction is a court's power to make decisions affecting the rights and interests of a particular person or entity
  • Tribal courts typically have personal jurisdiction over tribal members and non-members who have sufficient contacts with the tribe or reservation
• Montana v. United States established the general rule that tribes lack civil regulatory authority over non-member activities on non-Indian fee lands within reservations, with two exceptions:
  • Tribes retain jurisdiction over non-members who enter into consensual relationships with the tribe or its members (contracts, leases, etc.)
  • Tribes maintain jurisdiction over non-member conduct that threatens or directly affects the tribe's political integrity, economic security, or health and welfare

Structure and Authority of Tribal Courts

• Tribal court systems vary in structure but often include trial courts, appellate courts, and specialized courts (family, juvenile, etc.)
  • Some tribes have separate courts for civil and criminal matters, while others have a unified court system
• Tribal courts derive their authority from the tribe's inherent sovereignty and any specific delegations of power from the tribal constitution or governing documents
• Concurrent jurisdiction occurs when both tribal and state or federal courts have the authority to hear a case
  • In such situations, the plaintiff may choose where to file the lawsuit, subject to applicable jurisdictional and procedural requirements
• Tribes possess civil regulatory authority over their members and territories, allowing them to enact and enforce laws related to various aspects of tribal life (zoning, environmental protection, business regulation, etc.)
  • This authority is essential for maintaining tribal self-government and promoting the welfare of the tribe and its members

Exhaustion Doctrine

Development of the Exhaustion Doctrine

• The exhaustion doctrine requires parties to exhaust available remedies in tribal court before seeking relief in federal court
• National Farmers Union Insurance v. Crow Tribe established the tribal court exhaustion requirement as a matter of comity and respect for tribal self-government
  • The Supreme Court held that federal courts should allow tribal courts to first determine their own jurisdiction and provide a forum for resolving disputes
• Iowa Mutual Insurance Co. v. LaPlante reinforced the exhaustion doctrine, holding that it applies even when federal court jurisdiction is based on diversity of citizenship
  • The Court emphasized the importance of promoting tribal self-government and minimizing interference with tribal court proceedings

Application and Consequences of the Exhaustion Doctrine

• Tribal court abstention refers to the principle that federal courts should abstain from hearing cases that are properly within the jurisdiction of tribal courts until tribal remedies have been exhausted
• Federal court deference to tribal court decisions is a key aspect of the exhaustion doctrine, recognizing the expertise and authority of tribal courts in matters of tribal law and jurisdiction
• The tribal exhaustion rule requires parties to exhaust available tribal court remedies before seeking relief in federal court, subject to limited exceptions (bad faith, lack of opportunity to challenge jurisdiction, express jurisdictional prohibitions, etc.)
• Comity, or the mutual respect and recognition between sovereigns, is a central justification for the exhaustion doctrine
  • By requiring exhaustion of tribal remedies, federal courts demonstrate respect for tribal sovereignty and the role of tribal courts in resolving disputes affecting tribal interests