Subject matter jurisdiction is a critical part of any case.
This is something that allows a Court to hear a case and exercise
authority over the parties. This is a defense that can be raised
at any time and it cannot be waived.
Under
federal law, a person who is an Indian that commits a crime in
Indian Country can not be prosecuted in state court. Depending on
the crime, they would either be in federal court or in tribal court.
At one time, it was believed that if the defendant is a non-Indian but the victim is an Indian and the
crime occurs in Indian Country, the offender will be in federal court.
However, on June 29, 2022, the United States Supreme Court decided the
case of Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, 142 S.Ct. 2486 (2022), which
held that the Federal Government and the State have concurrent
jurisdiction over crimes committed by non-Indians against Indians in
Indian Country.
The exception to the rule concerning jurisdiction seems to be over
Section 14 of the Curtis Act. While this issue is still being
litigated, Section 14 of the Curtis Act gives municipalities that
were organized under the Curtis Act jurisdiction over "all
inhabitants" within their boundaries, including Indians. (It is
important to note that regardless of litigation, if the town was not
organized under the Curtis Act, it has no jurisdiction over Indians.)
Indian Country is an area
that by treaty has been established as a reservation for an Indian
tribe. The character of the reservation does not change based upon
how the land is owned. (Imagine if the State of Oklahoma shrunk because the government sold land to a private person. In
the same way, an Indian Reservation is not diminished by selling land to
non-Indians.)
