Legislation

Senate Votes Down Amendment to Remove Tribal Provisions from Violence Against Women Act

In Senate floor speech, Sen. Cantwell urged colleagues to reject amendment that would have cut protections for Tribal victims

Cantwell: ‘This is about the life and death of women who need a better system to prosecute those who are committing serious crimes against them’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today on the Senate floor, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Chairwoman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, urged her Senate colleagues to reject an amendment to the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (S.47) that would have stripped critical protections for Tribal women. The amendment was defeated by a vote of 31-59 this evening.

The amendment would have removed the vast majority of Section 904 of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act, which ensures that non-Indian defendants in Tribal court are afforded due process in a manner consistent with state and federal courts. This includes the right to effective assistance of counsel, the right to a trial by an impartial jury, as well as all other Constitutional rights.

“This isn’t about politics. This isn’t about a debate on what is a good way to win votes somewhere in America,” Cantwell said in a floor speech prior to the vote. “This is about the life and death of women who need a better system to help prosecute those who are committing serious crimes against them.”

Watch a video of Senator Cantwell’s floor speech here.

Last week Senator Cantwell spoke on the Senate floor about a similar amendment that would overturn Tribal jurisdiction and limit the ability of Tribal courts to punish non-Indian domestic violence offenders who assault Indian women.

Cantwell is an original co-sponsor of the bill introduced by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) on January 22, 2013. Since the first VAWA bill passed in 1994, domestic violence has decreased by 53 percent. The reauthorization bill includes critical improvements to extend domestic violence protections to individuals, including women in Tribal communities, who are currently not protected. An estimated 40 percent of Native women experience domestic violence in their lifetimes. Eighty percent of perpetrators of these crimes are non-Indian, and under current law, are not likely to be prosecuted by Tribal governments.

Previous reauthorizations of VAWA have been approved in a timely fashion with overwhelming support. Last Congress, a similar Senate version of the VAWA reauthorization bill passed the Senate by a bipartisan vote of 68-31, but ultimately stalled in the House. S. 47 has 60 co-sponsors and is expected to head to the Senate floor for final passage tomorrow.

Cantwell has been a consistent champion for the reauthorization of VAWA. In December, she joined six of her female Democratic Senate colleagues to call for House passage of VAWA before Congress adjourned for the year. In April 2012, she joined Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) at the King County Sheriff’s office to highlight the benefits of the bill to local law enforcement.

Continue reading →

Amendment 13 VAWA Vote

February 12, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. Senator Barrasso, Vice Chair of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, among the R’s voting to strip tribal jurisdiction provision.

News Profile of VAWA Reauthorization with Comments from Umatilla

February 11, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. Also includes mention of a law review article by Brent Leonhard, which we posted about here.

VAWA Bill Set for Vote on Monday, NCAI Press Release

February 9, 2013June 6, 2013Victoria Sweet

The official NCAI Press Release Here.

Senator Coburn has filed an amendment to strip the tribal provisions from VAWA. Here

Letter from NCAI Task Force co-chairs expressing opposition to amendments like the Coburn Amendment Here

Excerpt from the letter:

The NCAI Task Force on Violence Against Women is extremely concerned that misunderstandings of the political status of Indian tribes and the internal workings of the tribal court system are causing confusion on how this provision will work on the ground. Indian tribes are not a racial class, they are a political body – so the question is not whether non-Indians are subject to Indian court – the question is whether tribal governments, political entities, have the necessary jurisdiction to provide their citizens with the

public safety protections every government has the inherent duty to provide.

Amendments which place more funding in the hands of federal authorities will not address this immediate local need. We believe strongly that local government is the best government for addressing public safety concerns. For example, an amendment is being offered today which would require that tribal governments petition a U.S. District Court for an “appropriately tailored protection order excluding any persons from areas within the Indian country of the tribe.” This level of procedure for an intimately local issue is not practical and will do little to improve matters on Indian reservations. Tribal courts are the appropriate venue to issue such protection orders.

NCAI Release in Support of Senate Version of VAWA

February 7, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

NCAI Reiterates Support for Senate Version of Violence Against Women Act;
Letter to Leahy and Crapo Calls for No Harmful Amendments to S.47

NCAI Policy Research Center Releases Brief on Violence Against Women Statistics

Washington, DC – In a letter sent to Senators Leahy and Crapo this morning, the National Congress of American Indians’ (NCAI) Taskforce on Violence Against Women expressed strong opposition to any harmful amendments offered to the Senate legislation to reauthorize the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). In the letter to the Senate co-authors of the legislation, NCAI expressed unified opposition to amendments to VAWA that would strip tribal jurisdiction provisions or alter the current language in S. 47 in a harmful manner.

The letter sent by NCAI Task Force co-chairs Juana Majel Dixon (Pauma Band of Mission Indians, CA) and Terri Henry (Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, NC) can be downloaded here, and highlights examples of amendments which the organization opposes:

“Amendments which place more funding in the hands of federal authorities will not address…local need. We believe strongly that local government is the best government for addressing public safety concerns. For example, an amendment is being offered today which would require that tribal governments petition a U.S. District Court for an ‘appropriately tailored protection order excluding any persons from areas within the Indian country of the tribe.’ This level of procedure for an intimately local issue is not practical and will do little to improve matters on Indian reservations. Tribal courts are the appropriate venue to issue such protection orders.

Also, tribal courts and authorities are the appropriate triers of fact for domestic violence matters conducted on Indian reservations. The federal system has proven ineffective in many respects, but none as detrimental to the backbone of a community as the area of domestic violence against Native women. Further many tribal courts operate in much the same manner as state courts, albeit with smaller dockets and lesser degrees of crime as their sister governments: state and federal courts. Also, all tribal courts are bound by the Indian Civil Rights Act, which, as amended, guarantees all of the constitutional rights non-Native defendants have in state courts.”

Additionally, NCAI’s Policy Research Center released today a new Policy Insight Brief titled, Statistics on Violence Against Native Women. The brief aims to provide detail on previously reported statistics and original sources of data used often in policy discussions, specifically focusing on the context in which the disproportional violence against Native women happens. The brief synthesizes data and provides context for critical tribal provisions of S. 47:

“From what we know about the high rates of intimate partner violence against Native women, about the fact that assaults against Native women tend to take place at private residences, about the reports from Native women of perceived perpetrator race, and about the high rates of interracial marriage and unmarried partners of Native women, it is clear that violence against Native women tends to be perpetrated by non-Native men.”

FEMA Director Statement on Disaster Relief and Tribal Governments

January 31, 2013January 31, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

An excerpt; okay, maybe the whole thing:

WASHINGTON – Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Craig Fugate released the below statement following the President’s signing of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013, which includes a provision to amend the Stafford Act allowing Tribes direct access to federal disaster relief.

“FEMA has strong, long-standing relationships with Tribal governments, and they are essential members of the emergency management team. We commend the efforts of Members of Congress, Tribal leadership and their organizations, the Department of Homeland Security, and the President who have made this change a reality. This legislative change to the Stafford Act will provide federally recognized Tribal governments the option to choose whether to make a request directly to the President for an emergency or major disaster declaration, or to receive assistance, as they do presently, through a declaration for a State. This amendment to the Stafford Act follows on the President’s commitments to Indian Country, strengthens the government to government relationship between FEMA and federally recognized Tribes, and will enhance the way FEMA supports Tribal communities before, during, and after disasters.”

Fully implementing this historic provision will require consultation with Tribes and other stakeholders, particularly as FEMA develops the administrative and programmatic requirements and procedures necessary to execute the law. FEMA will provide interim guidance in the coming weeks explaining how and when Tribal governments may seek declarations, while more comprehensive consultations and administrative procedures are undertaken.

Navajo Nation Press Release on Disaster Relief Bill Approval

January 29, 2013January 29, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here. Our post with the bill text is here. The press release text:

Bipartisan Disaster Relief Bill Approved

Tribes To Be Treated Like States, Navajo President Encouraged

WASHINGTON—In a 62-36 vote, the Senate last night approved HR 152, a $50.5 billion package aimed at providing relief and assisting the recovery of communities that were devastated by last October’s Hurricane Sandy.

Included in the measure are provisions that change federal disaster laws to treat tribes as state, rather than local governments.

Having actively encouraged the changes since early last year through meetings and letters with congressional and administration officials and staff, Navajo Nation President Ben Shelly expressed his thanks to Congress for this bold affirmation of tribal sovereignty.

“The Navajo Nation has had a distinct government since before the United States gained its independence from a colonial power. The United States is committed by law and treaty to the self-governance of the Navajo Nation, and working with us on a government-to-government basis. The passage of this bill is a welcoming sign of the blossoming recognition nationally of the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation as a co-equal government within the United States. I appreciate the bipartisan team in Congress that approved this bill, and the bold leadership of the Obama Administration and FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate in endorsing the proposal”.

After the president signs the bill into law, FEMA will hold consultations on the successful implementation of the measure in the coming months.

Stafford Act Amendments (Sandy Relief Bill) Passes: Includes Tribal Emergency Requests Provision

January 29, 2013January 29, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the bill (H.R. 152), and relevant text (Section 1110):

SEC. 1110. TRIBAL REQUESTS FOR A MAJOR DISASTER OR EMERGENCY DECLARATION UNDER THE STAFFORD ACT.

(a) Major Disaster Requests- Section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170) is amended–

(1) by striking `All requests for a declaration’ and inserting `(a) In General- All requests for a declaration’; and

(2) by adding at the end the following:

`(b) Indian Tribal Government Requests-

`(1) IN GENERAL- The Chief Executive of an affected Indian tribal government may submit a request for a declaration by the President that a major disaster exists consistent with the requirements of subsection (a).

`(2) REFERENCES- In implementing assistance authorized by the President under this Act in response to a request of the Chief Executive of an affected Indian tribal government for a major disaster declaration, any reference in this title or title III (except sections 310 and 326) to a State or the Governor of a State is deemed to refer to an affected Indian tribal government or the Chief Executive of an affected Indian tribal government, as appropriate.

`(3) SAVINGS PROVISION- Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit an Indian tribal government from receiving assistance under this title through a declaration made by the President at the request of a State under subsection (a) if the President does not make a declaration under this subsection for the same incident.

`(c) Cost Share Adjustments for Indian Tribal Governments-

`(1) IN GENERAL- In providing assistance to an Indian tribal government under this title, the President may waive or adjust any payment of a non-Federal contribution with respect to the assistance if–

`(A) the President has the authority to waive or adjust the payment under another provision of this title; and

`(B) the President determines that the waiver or adjustment is necessary and appropriate.

`(2) CRITERIA FOR MAKING DETERMINATIONS- The President shall establish criteria for making determinations under paragraph (1)(B).’.

(b) Emergency Requests- Section 501 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5191) is amended by adding at the end the following:

`(c) Indian Tribal Government Requests-

Continue reading →