to advance bills to acknowledge groups as federally recognized Indian tribes. Indian country is also working to protect funding for key programs in the appropriations and farm bill, as discussed in more detail below. Limit Impacts of Castro-Huerta . Tribes nationwide continue to debate how to address the expected fallout from the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in Castro-Huerta v. Oklahoma , which held that state governments have concurrent jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indians against Native victims on Indian lands. The Court reasoned that under its “precedents, federal law may preempt state jurisdiction in certain circumstances. But otherwise, as a matter of state sovereignty, a State has jurisdiction over all of its territory, including Indian country.” (Citing the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution for this statement). The longstanding authority in Indian country is that a state only has the power to exercise authority on Indian lands pursuant to an express act of Congress or the consent of the Tribe. The Castro-Huerta Court turns this presumption on its head, imposing a new test: “unless [affirmatively] preempted [by an Act of Congress], States may exercise jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed by non-Indians against Indians in Indian country.” Indian Country will work through the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, the House Natural Resources Committee, and the Biden Administration to blunt the impacts of this decision on tribal sovereignty, including potential down-the-road impacts on Tribal Government taxing authority, civil and regulatory jurisdiction over non-Indians, and related impacts on Tribal government economies. ICWA Protection. On July 15, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Brackeen v. Haaland . Several states had argued that ICWA’s placement preferences violate the Constitution’s equal protection clause and unlawfully commandeers state governments. In a significant 7-2 victory for Indian country, the Court upheld ICWA as constitutional. Justice Gorsuch noted the decision “safeguards the ability of tribal members to raise their children free from interference by state authorities and other outside parties. In the process, the Court also goes a long way toward restoring the original balance between federal, state, and tribal powers the Constitution envisioned.” However, the Court did not rule on the merits regarding the equal protection challenge to ICWA. That claim was dismissed for lack of standing and could be subject to a future legal challenge. Tribal Tax Provisions. Indian Country will continue to press Congress to enact key reforms to the U.S. Tax Code to respect the governmental status of Indian Tribes for purposes of issuing tax- exempt bonds and acknowledge direct tribal government access to the Low-Income Housing and New Markets tax credit programs, respect tribal court rulings for the purpose of the federal child adoption tax credit, provide parity to the tax and pension treatment of tribal police officers and other key tribal government officials, among other longstanding needs. Indian Health Service Advanced Appropriations. Indian Country achieved a historic victory in securing advance appropriations for Indian health care services and programs as part of the FY’23 Omnibus Appropriations Act. However, this achievement fell short of permanent advance appropriations funding. As a result, while funding is secure to prevent impacts from delayed funding or a government shutdown for FY’24, tribes nationwide will work to retain at least one-year advance appropriations in the next spending package. 2023 Farm Bill. The House and Senate Agricultural Committees are working through the process of drafting their Farm Bill reauthorization legislation. Generally, the farm bill comes before Congress every five years, with the current (2018) farm bill set to expire on September 30. The Farm Bill process is never easy; however, several factors will make this reauthorization an uphill battle. First, Republicans are looking to cut back funding for most programs in the bill, especially those under the Conservation title. Many USDA programs received significant funding under the COVID relief bill and the IRA. Republican members argue that those plus-ups should count as a sort of forward funding, and the Farm Bill should reflect that. Second, Republicans would like to cut nutrition programs within the bill. Republicans secured some increased work requirements for the SNAP food
3
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs