[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 20]
[House]
[Pages 27541-27542]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   INDIAN PUEBLO LAND ACT AMENDMENTS

  Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
Senate bill (S. 279) to amend the Act of June 7, 1924, to provide for 
the exercise of criminal jurisdiction.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                 S. 279

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. INDIAN PUEBLO LAND ACT AMENDMENTS.

       The Act of June 7, 1924 (43 Stat. 636, chapter 331), is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 20. CRIMINAL JURISDICTION.

       ``(a) In General.--Except as otherwise provided by 
     Congress, jurisdiction over offenses committed anywhere 
     within the exterior boundaries of any grant from a prior 
     sovereign, as confirmed by Congress or the Court of Private 
     Land Claims to a Pueblo Indian tribe of New Mexico, shall be 
     as provided in this section.
       ``(b) Jurisdiction of the Pueblo.--The Pueblo has 
     jurisdiction, as an act of the Pueblos' inherent power as an 
     Indian tribe, over any offense committed by a member of the 
     Pueblo or an Indian as defined in title 25, sections 1301(2) 
     and 1301(4), or by any other Indian-owned entity.
       ``(c) Jurisdiction of the United States.--The United States 
     has jurisdiction over any offense described in chapter 53 of 
     title 18,

[[Page 27542]]

     United States Code, committed by or against an Indian as 
     defined in title 25, sections 1301(2) and 1301(4) or any 
     Indian-owned entity, or that involves any Indian property or 
     interest.
       ``(d) Jurisdiction of the State of New Mexico.--The State 
     of New Mexico shall have jurisdiction over any offense 
     committed by a person who is not a member of a Pueblo or an 
     Indian as defined in title 25, sections 1301(2) and 1301(4), 
     which offense is not subject to the jurisdiction of the 
     United States.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Radanovich) and the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Udall) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California.


                             General Leave

  Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on the bill under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RADANOVICH. I yield myself as much time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, S. 279, a bill sponsored by Senator Domenici, clarifies 
the uncertainty and potential law enforcement jurisdiction problems on 
all 19 Indian Pueblo reservations in the State of New Mexico.
  From 1913 to 2001, the United States Government prosecuted crimes 
committed by or against the New Mexico Pueblo Indians within the 
exterior boundaries of their reservation lands in the State of New 
Mexico. However, in 2001, a Federal judge, relying on a case about 
tribal jurisdiction in the State of Alaska, ruled that felonies 
committed by Indians on private lands within the boundaries of New 
Mexico Pueblos are not subject to Federal jurisdiction. The U.S. 
Attorney for New Mexico did not appeal the decision and, therefore, has 
failed to prosecute any felonies by or against Indians on these lands.
  At the same time that the Federal Government was declining to 
prosecute any felonies on Indian Pueblo lands, a New Mexico State court 
ruled that the State of New Mexico lacked jurisdiction to prosecute 
felonies committed by an Indian defendant against a non-Indian on 
private lands within the Pueblos. As a result, there is currently a 
large void in criminal jurisdiction at the Federal, State, and tribal 
levels.
  S. 279 corrects this void of jurisdiction by clarifying that, one, 
the United States will have jurisdiction over crimes defined under the 
Major Crimes Act committed by or against any Indian; two, the State of 
New Mexico will have jurisdiction clarified as to non-member Indians or 
non-Indians for all non-Major Crimes Act offenses; and, three, the New 
Mexico Pueblo governments will have jurisdiction over their individual 
members or other Indians for other offenses.
  S. 279 enjoys bipartisan support and has the support of the entire 
New Mexico delegation. I look forward to passing this necessary 
legislation and urge its timely enactment in this session.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this legislation and to pay 
particular tribute to our colleague from New Mexico (Mr. Udall). Mr. 
Udall introduced a companion bill as H.R. 600, and he has been a true 
champion for passage of this important legislation. He has worked 
tirelessly to impress upon us the urgency and the timeliness of these 
provisions.
  Once enacted, as my good friend from California pointed out, this 
language will clarify the boundaries of criminal jurisdiction among the 
State, county, and tribal governments for lands on and near the New 
Mexico Pueblos.
  As a result of some recent court decisions in New Mexico, certain 
Indian lands have gone without any government protection from criminal 
acts. As the former Attorney General of New Mexico, Mr. Udall 
understands fully that this put Native Americans in his district in a 
very perilous position.
  I congratulate the gentleman from New Mexico for his tenacity in 
getting this issue to the forefront and commend him on the humility he 
showed in insisting the Senate bill be moved, rather than his own, in 
order to more quickly enact the legislation. Knowing him as I do, I am 
not surprised that he put doing the right thing for the Pueblos of New 
Mexico far ahead of scoring political points.
  I strongly support this bill and urge all of our colleagues to 
support passage of Senate bill 279.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from New Mexico (Mr. Udall).
  Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of 
Senate bill 279, legislation that amends the Indian Pueblo Land Act of 
June 7, 1924, to provide for the exercise of criminal jurisdiction 
within the exterior boundaries of Pueblo lands. Earlier this session, I 
introduced a companion to this bill on behalf of myself and cosponsors 
Heather Wilson and Stevan Pearce.
  This legislation addresses confusion over criminal jurisdiction on 
Pueblo lands in New Mexico that arose out of the holding in United 
States v. Jose Gutierrez, an unreported decision of a Federal district 
court judge in the district of New Mexico that overturned prior 
precedent regarding the jurisdictional status of the lands within the 
exterior boundaries of Pueblo grants.
  The Gutierrez decision created uncertainty and the potential for a 
void in criminal jurisdiction on Pueblo lands. Some call these 
prosecution-free zones. Because of the risk to public safety and law 
enforcement arising out of this uncertainty, it is important that we 
clarify the scope of criminal jurisdiction on Pueblo lands.
  Nothing in this legislative clarification is intended to diminish the 
scope of Pueblo civil jurisdiction within the exterior boundaries of 
Pueblo grants, which is defined by Federal and tribal laws and court 
decisions.

                              {time}  1445

  This legislation also does not, in any way, diminish the exterior 
boundaries of these grants. The All-Indian Pueblo Council of the 19 
Pueblo Governors has agreed to the language included in this 
legislation. The governors recognize the urgency of this matter and 
have come to Congress asking that we do everything in our power to 
avoid the unfathomable situation of creating places in New Mexico where 
someone could literally get away with murder. We here in Congress must 
also recognize the urgency of this situation and take action to address 
it.
  By closing the criminal jurisdictional loophole, we have opened the 
doors to justice for victims and their families. The Pueblo members and 
victims who fought for this legislation have demonstrated an 
unrelenting dedication to change the system for the better, and in 
doing so, they have ensured that others will never face the same scary 
situation.
  I want to thank all the New Mexicans who fought for this legislation. 
I also sincerely appreciate the work of my colleagues Representatives 
Heather Wilson and Stevan Pearce in the House and Senators Domenici and 
Bingaman.
  Mr. UDALL of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I have no additional requests for 
time, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Boozman). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Radanovich) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the Senate bill, S. 279.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the Senate bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________