United States v. Lara (2004)
E613636
United States v. Lara (2004) is a U.S. Supreme Court decision that affirmed Congress’s authority to recognize and expand the inherent sovereign powers of Native American tribes, particularly their power to prosecute certain nonmember Indians.
Observed surface forms (1)
| Surface form | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| United States v. Lara | 0 |
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States Supreme Court case
ⓘ
criminal law case ⓘ double jeopardy case ⓘ |
| affirms | Congress’s power to relax restrictions on tribal sovereignty previously imposed by the political branches or the Court ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal procedure ⓘ federal Indian law ⓘ |
| aroseFrom | Spirit Lake Tribe NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| clarifies | tribes may exercise inherent criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians when Congress authorizes it ⓘ |
| concerns |
Congressional power over Indian affairs
ⓘ
Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment NERFINISHED ⓘ tribal criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians ⓘ |
| distinguishesFrom | Duro v. Reina NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| follows | Congress’s legislative response to Duro v. Reina ⓘ |
| hasArgumentDate | January 21, 2004 ⓘ |
| hasChiefJusticeAtDecision | William H. Rehnquist NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCitation | 541 U.S. 193 ⓘ |
| hasConcurrenceBy |
Anthony M. Kennedy
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED ⓘ John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED ⓘ Sandra Day O’Connor NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasCourt | Supreme Court of the United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasDecisionDate | April 19, 2004 ⓘ |
| hasDissentBy |
Clarence Thomas
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
David H. Souter NERFINISHED ⓘ Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasDocketNumber | No. 03-107 ⓘ |
| hasMajorityOpinionBy | Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasPage | 193 ⓘ |
| hasPetitioner | United States NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasReporter | United States Reports NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasRespondent | Billy Jo Lara NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| hasVolume | 541 ⓘ |
| hasVote | 7–2 ⓘ |
| holds |
Congress has authority to recognize and expand the inherent sovereign powers of Indian tribes
NERFINISHED
ⓘ
subsequent federal prosecution for the same conduct does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause ⓘ tribal prosecution of a nonmember Indian under restored inherent authority is an exercise of tribal, not federal, sovereignty ⓘ |
| impact | strengthened recognition of inherent tribal criminal jurisdiction over nonmember Indians ⓘ |
| interpretsStatute |
1990 amendments to the Indian Civil Rights Act
ⓘ
25 U.S.C. § 1301(2) ⓘ Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | federal question jurisdiction ⓘ |
| legalIssue | whether tribal and federal prosecutions of the same defendant for the same conduct constitute prosecutions by separate sovereigns ⓘ |
| modifiesEffectOf | Duro v. Reina NERFINISHED ⓘ |
| relatesTo |
dual sovereignty doctrine
ⓘ
plenary power of Congress over Indian tribes ⓘ tribal sovereignty ⓘ |
| result | Eighth Circuit reversed ⓘ |
| subjectMatter | criminal assault on a federal officer on an Indian reservation ⓘ |
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.