|
The Kansas Act of 1940 addressed the means by which Congress could use its power under the Indian Commerce Clause to authorize a state's ability to exercise jurisdiction in certain instances. Because the inherent sovereignty of Indian nations generally precluded state jurisdiction over Indian country,〔 〕 the Act became one of the first legislative actions to permit state jurisdiction over most offenses committed by or against Indians on Indian reservations. This was a departure from previous federal policy in which the Federal Government had sole jurisdiction over Indians. The Act was a precursor to the Indian termination policy and in essence was a kind of "trial legislation" to see if such transfers would be effective.〔 〕 Several other states followed suit. Today, the jurisdictional gap which existed when the Kansas Act was passed no longer exists, and instead there is an overlap; a native person committing a single crime within Indian country in the state of Kansas could be prosecuted by the United States, the State of Kansas, and one of the tribes. ==Background== In March 1938, Potawatomi Agency Superintendent Bruce contacted federal legislators from Kansas and proposed a bill for Kansas to obtain jurisdiction over criminal cases on Indian lands in Kansas. There was a perception, that because at that time, none of the four tribes —- Potawatomi, Kickapoo, Sac & Fox, Iowa —- had tribal courts to deal with offenses,〔(【引用サイトリンク】title=Negonsott v. Samuels, Warden, et al. Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, No. 91–5397 ) 〕 lawlessness would prevail if the state were not allowed jurisdiction over crimes that were not federal offenses. In addition, because of the allotment program, approximately 80,000 acres of Indian land had been assigned to tribal members and were in state jurisdiction, while only about 35,000 acres of Indian land were held in the federal trust. Bruce cited 6 reasons the Federal Government might support the transfer: * Lack of tribal courts; * Institutionalized tribe members in Jackson and Brown counties were paid for by the county, not Indian Services; * The majority of land owned by tribal members was not part of federal jurisdiction; * Borderline cases could result in obstruction of justice with overlapping jurisdictions; * Tribal support; and * Expense and inconvenience of traveling to federal courts would be eliminated. Up until this time, Kansas had exercised jurisdiction over offenses, including those listed in the Indian Major Crimes Act, but when that authority was called into question, the state sought clarification of its authority. Accordingly, the stated purpose of the act was to “merely confirm a relationship which the State has willingly assumed, which the Indians have willingly accepted, and which has produced successful results, over a considerable period of years.” H. R. Rep., at 5; S. Rep., at 5.4〔507 U. S. 99 (1993) , p 107〕 It is unclear if Bruce exerted influence on the tribes to accept a complete transfer to state jurisdiction, or if the tribes proposed it to Bruce, but within a short time frame, all four tribes passed resolutions to transfer criminal jurisdiction on Indian lands to state courts from federal courts. The Kickapoo resolution was dated 24 February 1938; the Sac & Fox resolution was dated 1 March 1938, as was the Iowa Tribe's resolution; and the Potawatomi resolution was dated 4 March 1938. Within days of the adoption of the tribal resolutions, Congressman Lambertson introduced House Resolution 9757, “A BILL To relinquish jurisdiction to the State of Kansas to prosecute Indians or others for offenses committed on Indian reservations.” Within two years, this bill would lead to the Kansas Act of 1940.〔Kansas Law Review, Vol 59 (2011), pp. 958-959〕 The 1938 version of the bill would have given Kansas State authorities exclusive jurisdiction over criminal offenses occurring on reservations, prevented federal prosecution and punishment of major crimes in Indian country, and prevented the Federal Government from asserting authority within Kansas under the General Crimes Act.〔Kansas Law Review, Vol 59 (2011), p. 960〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Kansas Act of 1940」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|