More on Consent to Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction

We should add that at least one legal commentator and at least one other tribal court has previously discussed non-Indian consent to tribal criminal jurisdiction. The article (which is about more than simply consent, and which was authored by Chris Chaney) is here:

14BYUJPubL173

And the case is here:

Navajo v Hunter

Hunter seems to be about implied consent, while Hjert seems to be about express consent (which was ruled by that court to be invalid).

Can a Tribe Prosecute a Non-Indian If He Consents? Opinion from Port Gamble S’Klallam

Every now and again we like to highlight an interesting tribal court opinion. Personally, I’ve been waiting for many years to see an opinion on this subject, answered in the negative by the court.

Here is the opinion in Port Gamble S’Klallam Tribe v. Hjert.

This case seems almost easy given that the tribal constitution self-limits tribal jurisdiction by referencing federal law, suggesting that Oliphant could control this case (see page 4, quoting the PGST Const.).

What about tribes that do not have such language?