United States Commission on Civil Rights

Confidential Draft Report
“Enforcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968”

May 1990

Indian Civil Rights, page 28
dismissed as having been already adjudicated, was affirmed by the ninth circuit [59] with a finding that due process under the ICRA and Constitution have the same meaning.  Moreover, said the ninth circuit:

We view the enactment of the Indian Civil Rights Act as evidence of this continuing congressional solicitude for the welfare of the American Indian.  The courts of the United States must be correspondingly more available to adjudicate, enforce and protect the civil rights specifically granted to the Indian peoples by the Congress.  Consequently, if a state court determination of a claim under the Indian Civil Rights Act is transparently erroneous, the District Court, in order to prevent a miscarriage of justice, need not accord full adjudicatory effect to the state court decision.[60]

      The second case cited by the Red Lake Tribe is United States v. E.K. [61]  The court there cited the language quoted above to the effect that there was no indication in the record that the parties were unable to secure a duly certified advocate or spokesman before the tribal court.[62]
     [58] (...continued)
held in suspended status awaiting the termination of this appeal."} (citations omitted)

     [59] Red Fox v. Red Fox, 564 F.2d 361 (9th Cir. 1977)

     [60] Id. (footnotes omitted).

     [61]  471 F. Supp. 924 (D. Or. 1979)

     [62]  Id. at 933.

< HOME >
< NEXT >