On November 10, the Senate Indian Affairs Committee held a hearing on several bills, including the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act (S. 1192) and the Stand Against Violence and Empower (SAVE) Native Women Act (S. 1763).
Sponsored by Sen. Mark Begich (D-AK), the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act would establish a demonstration program at the Office of Justice Programs at the Department of Justice that will give a limited number of Indian tribes the legal jurisdiction and enforcement capabilities to reduce domestic violence against Native women and children, among other provisions.
The SAVE Native Women Act, sponsored by Sen. Daniel Akaka (D-HI), would amend the Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-351) to include sex trafficking among the crimes for which the federal government may provide grants to Indian tribal governments and organizations for the purposes of reducing or eliminating violence against Indian women.
The provision of services to youth who are victims of, or have been exposed to, domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking would be added to the list of eligible uses of grants under S. 1763. The bill also would include “the development of legislation and policies that enhance best practices for responding to violent crimes against Indian women” as one of the eligible uses.
Tribal coalition grants also would be established in order to increase awareness of violence against Indian women; improve responses to such violence at the state, federal, and local levels; identify and provide technical assistance to improve access to services for women who have been victimized; and develop and promote best practices for responding to such violence.
Tribes and tribal organizations also would be granted jurisdiction over domestic violence crimes and violations of protective orders.
“For a host of reasons, the current legal structure for prosecuting domestic violence in Indian country is inadequate to prevent or stop this pattern of escalating violence,” said Thomas Perrelli, associate attorney general at the Department of Justice (DOJ). He added, “Until recently, no matter how violent the offense, tribal courts could only sentence Indian offenders to one year in prison. Under the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 [P.L. 111-211], landmark legislation enacted last year in no small part due to the efforts of this committee, tribal courts can now sentence Indian offenders for up to three years per offense, provided defendants are given certain procedural protections, including legal counsel. But tribal courts have no authority at all to prosecute a non-Indian, even if he lives on the reservation and is married to a tribal member. Tribal police officers who respond to a domestic violence call, only to discover that the accused is non-Indian and therefore outside the tribe’s criminal jurisdiction, often mistakenly believe they cannot even make an arrest.”
In explaining DOJ’s support of the SAVE Native Women Act, Mr. Perrelli said, “First…the SAVE Act recognizes certain tribes’ power to exercise concurrent criminal jurisdiction over domestic violence cases, regardless of whether the defendant is Indian or non-Indian…Second…the SAVE Act confirms the intent of Congress in enacting the Violence Against Women Act of 2000 [P.L. 106-386] by clarifying that tribal courts have full civil jurisdiction to issue and enforce certain protection orders involving any persons, Indian or non-Indian. Third…the SAVE Act provides a one-year offense for assaulting a person by striking, beating, or wounding; a five-year offense for assaulting a spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner, resulting in substantial bodily injury; and a ten-year offense for assaulting a spouse, intimate partner, or dating partner by strangling or suffocating.”
Suzanne Koepplinger, executive director of the Minnesota Indian Women’s Resource Center, said, “We believe a significant amount of sex trafficking takes place in cities and towns, where the market exists and where runaway youth are often lured. Building a network of urban and tribal supports and services is key to long term success. There are challenges to identifying and serving sex trafficking victims, and to collecting data on the scope of sex trafficking in Indian country. This is due in part to the reluctance of many women to identify as victims of a crime and report exploitation to authorities. They are more likely to disclose and seek help from advocates in the field. Front line advocates in tribal human services and urban Indian organizations are well positioned to identify and respond to the needs of victims, and will be strong allies in the effort to collect baseline data. Service providers can also be crucial partners in the prosecution of pimps and traffickers. When victims feel safe and supported through access to culturally based long term housing and support services, they may be more likely to cooperate with law enforcement in prosecuting perpetrators. Many communities are just now beginning to understand and respond to sex trafficking, and more training, awareness, and capacity building is required. This bill will provide many of those needed steps forward, and I urge you to pass this legislation that will greatly improve the safety and security of American Indian women and girls, and give tribes the authority to effectively protect, intervene, and prosecute perpetrators of gender based violence.”
In expressing the state’s opposition to the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act, Joe Masters, commissioner of the Alaska Department of Public Safety, said, “Problems with sexual assault and domestic violence in rural Alaska are systemic and longstanding. But state law enforcement efforts, through the state’s concerted efforts to hire and train local officers to serve in rural communities, and through the programs in the governor’s initiative, demonstrate the state’s commitment to improving the quality of life in these communities. I submit to you that Alaska’s rural justice system can be improved, and there is a justifiable perception that supports the notion that it has been underfunded. But the system is not broken. We are encouraged that Congress is evaluating Alaska’s law enforcement needs, and suggest that collaborative efforts among the state, the federal government, and the tribes are required to tackle this problem. There are significant provisions within the Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act that will promote safety and enable local communities to take a more active role in their own wellness. However, ambiguous provisions that may create Indian country and criminal jurisdiction will be counterproductive to the collaborative efforts already in place. For example, rather than creating a new category of law enforcement officer (as the proposal does), federal dollars directed to train existing officers, such as VPSOs [village public safety officers] and VPOs [village police officers], would go a long way to increasing services in rural Alaska. Local law enforcement officers, whether village police officers, tribal police officers, or VPSOs, would benefit greatly from training and assistance in the following areas: organizing their departments and activities to provide effective services; writing police reports; documenting crime scenes with cameras and tape recorders; caring for evidence once seized; testifying in court; and ensuring that discovery is made available to criminal defendants and their attorneys…The Alaska Safe Families and Villages Act assumes that the federal government must step in and impose jurisdictional solutions. We don’t believe that having the federal government divide the state into jurisdictional project areas for roughly 230 separate tribes is a practical approach for the long term. Alaska can point to specific needs for law enforcement training, technical and programmatic support to village and tribal councils, and other programs at the regional and community levels where the federal government can truly be part of the solution. We hope you will consider those.
Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Mark Begich (D-AK), Thomas Heffelfinger, attorney at Best & Flanagan LLP in Minneapolis, MN; The Honorable Margie Mejia, chair of the Lytton Rancheria in Santa Rosa, CA; The Honorable Paul Morris, mayor of San Pablo, CA, and Ralph Anderson, president and chief executive officer of the Bristol Bay Native Association in Dillingham, AK, also testified.
