Search

I. INTRODUCTION "The outrage and anguish of the Native families who have lost loved ones to violence--whose mothers, daughters, sisters, and aunties have disappeared or been murdered--has recently propelled a [...], Until 2022, all but one of the 229 Alaska tribes were barred from special domestic violence criminal jurisdiction (SDVCJ): Congress's jurisdictional tool for tribal courts to address domestic violence and hold perpetrators of violence against Alaska Native women criminally accountable. The reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in 2022 brought SDVCJ to Alaska's rural Native communities. This landmark achievement was made possible by decades of advocacy from Alaska's tribal, state, and federal leadership. In the wake of VAWA 2022, Alaska tribes and tribal justice systems face several significant legal, political, and cultural challenges. This Article outlines the legal and practical issues Alaska Native tribes face when implementing SDVCJ. To do so, this Article includes an overview of tribal jurisdiction under VAWA and Alaska Native tribes' inclusion in VAWA 2022. This Article explores the lessons learned from the Lower 48 Tribes Accelerated Pilot Program, which was an accelerated pilot project that permitted specific tribes to begin exercising SDVCJ more than a year before the law was implemented for all tribes, and considerations based on Alaska's ongoing public safety and domestic violence crisis, community needs and standards, and unique tribal law enforcement context. The Article also discusses how Alaskan tribes moving towards implementing SDVCJ in their courts may create Native-led, trauma-informed judicial processes for domestic violence survivors and communities in partnership with existing resources from Alaska Native-led civil organizations while including lessons learned from the Lower 48 Tribes Accelerated Pilot Program.

"Moving forward, the Court cheerily promises, more prosecuting authorities can only "help." Three sets of prosecutors--federal, tribal, and state--are sure to prove better than two. But again it's not hard [...]

This is a transcript of a discussion hosted by the Indian Legal Program, and the Indian Gaming and Tribal Self-Governance Programs, at the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, Arizona [...]

I. INTRODUCTION 468 II. FEDERAL OVERINVOLVEMENT IN INTRA-TRIBAL CRIMINAL LAW: 1817-2004 471 III. THE CASE OF LEZMOND 477 MITCHELL A. The Facts 478 B. The Extra-(Un)Constitutional Imposition of the Death [...], On August 26, 2020, the only Native American on federal death row, Lezmond Mitchell was executed by the federal government for the murder of two Navajo citizens on Navajo Nation land. Federal law typically gives Tribal Nations the right to determine whether the death penalty is used against their citizens for crimes committed between Tribal citizens on Tribal land. Yet here, the federal government utilized a loophole to seek the death penalty against the Navajo Nation's wishes. Lezmond Mitchell was not a sympathetic man by any means; indeed, he brutally killed a grandmother and her young granddaughter to steal their car as a part of a larger robbery scheme. Under other circumstances, his execution may have been less controversial, yet his case exemplifies the long colonial legacy of federal overinvolvement in Tribal Nation affairs. This paper examines the colonial legacy of federal overinvolvement in Tribal Nation criminal justice affairs and exemplifies how that history still manifests in the present through Lezmond Mitchell's case. Further, this paper explores two questions: first, whether the Constitution truly empowers the federal government to intervene in criminal law matters that involve only Tribal citizens and occur entirely on Tribal land; and second, whether such involvement in Lezmond Mitchell's case, as well as more broadly, is consistent with the United States' obligations under international law, namely the self-determination and cultural rights of Tribal Nations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the United Nations Charter.

I. THE KHMER ROUGE AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE ECCC 122 A. The Reign of Democratic Kampuchea 122 B. Establishment and Features of the ECCC 124 C. ECCC Jurisprudence and [...], During its reign from 1975 to 1979, the Khmer Rouge was responsible for eradicating approximately twenty percent of the Cambodian population. Forty years later, only three leaders of the deadly regime have been held criminally responsible for the deaths of almost two million individuals. The Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (the "ECCC" or "Tribunal") is a unique "hybrid" international criminal tribunal jointly established by the Cambodian government and the United Nations in 2006, with the stated purpose of prosecuting those "most responsible" for the Khmer Rouge's mass atrocities. Yet, after more than a decade of proceedings, it has become increasingly likely that the ECCC will not fulfill its stated mandate. Since inception, the Tribunal has been plagued by political interference. Throughout its twelve years of operation, the Cambodian government has compromised the judicial independence of the Tribunal in an effort to block prosecutions into surviving Khmer Rouge leaders, many of whom occupy high-ranking governmental positions. This interference has recently manifested itself in ECCC decisions stringently limiting the scope of the Tribunal's personal jurisdiction. These decisions have resulted in the dismissal of all charges against one of four defendants before the Tribunal and present grave concerns regarding the viability of prosecutions against the remaining three. Amidst substantiated allegations of corruption and bribery within the Tribunal, these recent decisions add weight to growing speculation as to the ECCC's potential closure. While recent scholarship has analyzed the Cambodian government's involvement in the ECCC, the effect of this interference on the Tribunal's increasingly narrow approach to personal jurisdiction has yet to be fully evaluated. This article tracks the history of and proceedings handled by the ECCC to explore the intersection between the Tribunal's lack of judicial independence and its recent unworkable approach to personal jurisdiction. In doing so, the article analyzes the ECCC's judicial opinions interpreting the scope of its personal jurisdiction, culminating in a discussion of its recent decision to dismiss all charges against Im Chaem. Finally, the article explores lessons to be derived both from the ECCC's approach to personal jurisdiction, as well as the U.N. 's joint operation of the Tribunal, for use in drafting legislation governing future hybrid criminal tribunals.

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1688 I. STATE ENFORCEMENT ALONE HAS MADE LITTLE PROGRESS AGAINST RAPE 1693 A. Extent and Trend of Victimization 1693 B. Reporting, Complaint Processing, Prosecutions, and 1700 [...], Sexual assault remains at high levels despite decades of legal reforms. The recent wave of accusations against public figures signals both the persistence of the problem and a new political climate for addressing it. The Article argues that Congress should make forcible rape a federal crime, to the limits of the Commerce Clause. This would bring federal assets to the fight against rape by redirecting them from enforcement of possessory crimes. The simple statutory proposal might be accompanied by a more ambitious reorganization of the Justice Department to include a Bureau of Violent Crimes. Replies are offered to objections based on federalism, feminism, civil liberties, and systemic feedback loops.

The commitment to bring safety and justice and restore the sacredness of women has only just begun; the sovereignty of women has always been sacred. (1) American Indian and Alaska [...]

INTRODUCTION 475 I. THE HOBBS ACT AND DAVID ANTHONY TAYLOR 476 II. GRAFTING THE HOLDING OF RAICH TO FIT TAYLOR All III. THE DISSENT'S COMMERCE CLAUSE INTERPRETATION 478 IV. TAYLOR'S [...]

B. The Constitutional Necessity of a Threshold Conflict As we saw above, unfairness in the context of due process limits on legislative jurisdiction means the upending of a defendant's expectations [...]

Over and over again during the past few decades, the federal government has launched ambitious international prosecutions in the service of U.S. national security goals. These extraterritorial prosecutions of terrorists, [...]

INTRODUCTION. I. TRIBAL CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IN INDIAN COUNTRY A. Historical Origins B. Oliphant: No Jurisdiction over Non-Indians C. Duro, the Duro Fix, and Lara: Jurisdiction over Nonmember Indians II. SPECIAL [...]

3. Allow ANCSA Corporation Lands to be Transferred to Tribal Governments and Put into Trust The ILOC Roadmap next suggests increasing the land base for Alaska tribes by transferring ANCSA [...]

INTRODUCTION There is a deficit of justice in rural Alaska. For thousands of years, Alaska's tribes had a functioning dispute resolution system. But with Western contact and incorporation into the [...], Extensive case law already exists in Alaska on the jurisdiction of tribal courts over domestic relations cases, with one of the seminal cases--John v. Baker--establishing that Alaska tribes have jurisdiction even in the absence of Indian country. A common assumption, though, is that Alaska tribes do not have jurisdiction over criminal offenses. This Article argues that both under the logic of John v. Baker and the development of Indian law in the Lower 48, Alaska tribes already possess inherent jurisdiction over criminal offenses within their Native villages. With the gamut of social challenges facing Alaska Natives in rural Alaska, tribes need to be empowered to exercise this jurisdiction.

During the fall of 1919, two American sailors bound for Rio de Janeiro hatched a plan to defraud the United States government. (1) When their scheme--which involved an unscrupulous Standard [...]

The white man's police have protected us only as well as the feathers of a bird protect it from the frosts of winter. Crowfoot, Blackfeet Chief (1) Future generations will [...]

Very few rights in the Bill of Rights have not been incorporated against the states. In McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment right to bear [...]

Assertions of extraterritorial jurisdiction have become increasingly frequent in the 21st century. Although a useful response to transnational crime, such assertions are often highly politicised and used by states to [...]

George Barton wrote his PhD thesis at Cambridge on "Jurisdiction over Visiting Forces". He published three spinoffs from the thesis in the British Yearbook of International Law. In all of [...]

INTRODUCTION Consider the following hypothetical scenario. Two brothers in Swain County, North Carolina, each fail to pay money judgments entered against them in two different local courts. Both men are [...]

The Children, Young Persons, and Their Families (Youth Courts Jurisdiction and Orders) Amendment Act 2010, which came into effect on 1 October 2010, could be considered the most significant change [...]

The extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction that a state exercises over members of its armed forces and various civilians associated with the forces cannot be easily explained in terms of the traditional [...]

INTRODUCTION On September 16, 2007, a bomb exploded near Nisour Square in Baghdad, Iraq. (1) The United States responded by sending Blackwater--a private military firm ("PMF") contracted to work for [...]