Duro v. Reina facts for kids

Quick facts for kids Duro v. Reina
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 29, 1989 Decided May 29, 1990
Full case name	Albert Duro v. Edward Reina, Chief of Police, Salt River Department of Public Safety, Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community, et al.
Docket nos.	88-6546
Citations	495 U.S. 676 (more) 110 S. Ct. 2053; 109 L. Ed. 2d 693; 1990 U.S. LEXIS 2696; 58 U.S.L.W. 4643
Prior history	Duro v. Reina, No. CIV. 84-2107 PHX.WPC, 1985 WL 260639 (D. Ariz. Jan. 8, 1985), vacated by 851 F.2d 1136 (9th Cir. 1987)
Subsequent history	On remand, 910 F.2d 673 (9th Cir. 1990); on remand, No. CIV 84–2107–PHX–RGS, 1994 WL 714015 (D. Ariz. Nov. 16, 1990)
Argument	Oral argument
Holding
An Indian tribe may not assert criminal jurisdiction over a nonmember Indian.
Court membership
Case opinions
Majority	Kennedy, joined by Rehnquist, White, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor, Scalia
Dissent	Brennan, joined by Marshall
Laws applied
Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968, 25 U.S.C. §§ 1301 et seq.
Superseded by
Department of Defense Appropriations Act of 1991

Duro v. Reina, 495 U.S. 676 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court concluded that Indian tribes could not prosecute Indians who were members of other tribes for crimes committed by those nonmember Indians on their reservations. The decision was not well received by the tribes, because it defanged their criminal codes by depriving them of the power to enforce them against anyone except their own members. In response, Congress amended a section of the Indian Civil Rights Act, 25 U.S.C. § 1301, to include the power to "exercise criminal jurisdiction over all Indians" as one of the powers of self-government.