{"id":12776,"date":"2021-06-11T09:20:23","date_gmt":"2021-06-11T13:20:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indianz.com\/News\/?p=12776"},"modified":"2021-06-11T09:23:24","modified_gmt":"2021-06-11T13:23:24","slug":"montana-free-press-supreme-court-supports-tribal-sovereignty-in-law-enforcement-case","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/indianz.com\/News\/2021\/06\/11\/montana-free-press-supreme-court-supports-tribal-sovereignty-in-law-enforcement-case\/","title":{"rendered":"Montana Free Press: Supreme Court supports tribal sovereignty in law enforcement case"},"content":{"rendered":"\"U.S.<\/a>
The U.S. Supreme Court is seen in September 2020 following the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Photo by Indianz.Com (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)<\/a><\/figcaption>\r\n
U.S. Supreme Court upholds tribal law enforcement authority over non-Natives<\/div>\r\n
United States v. Cooley<\/em> originated on the Crow Reservation in 2016.<\/div>\r\n
Friday, June 11, 2021<\/div>\r\n
By Mara Silvers<\/div>\r\n
Montana Free Press<\/DIV>\r\n
montanafreepress.org<\/A><\/DIV>\r\n

<\/P>\r\nThe United States Supreme Court last Tuesday reversed a lower court ruling limiting tribal law enforcement authority to stop and search non-Native residents. The high court\u2019s unanimous decision in United States v. Cooley<\/em>, which originated on the Crow Reservation in southeast Montana, was heralded as a win for tribal sovereignty and law enforcement authority<\/a>.\r\n

<\/P>\r\nIn the June 1 opinion issued by Justice Stephen Breyer<\/a>, the court found that restricting tribal law enforcement officers from stopping, searching and temporarily detaining non-Native people could compromise officers\u2019 ability to protect the \u201chealth or welfare of the tribe.\u201d That language stems from a previous case, Montana v. United States<\/em><\/a>, in which the court ruled against the Crow Tribe\u2019s ability to regulate fishing and hunting by non-tribal members on land that is not owned by the tribe. That limitation on the tribe\u2019s enforcement authority, Breyer wrote, was issued with important exceptions, including a provision for responding to threats against a tribe\u2019s health or welfare.\r\n

<\/P>\r\n\u201cTo deny a tribal police officer authority to search and detain for a reasonable time any person he or she believes may commit or has committed a crime would make it difficult for tribes to protect themselves against ongoing threats,\u201d Breyer wrote in the Cooley<\/em> decision. \u201cSuch threats may be posed by, for instance, non-Indian drunk drivers, transporters of contraband, or other criminal offenders operating on roads within the boundaries of a tribal reservation.\u201d\r\n

<\/p>\r\n