|
|
United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977)
United States v. Antelope No. 75-661 Argued January 18, 1977 Decided April 19, 1977 430 U.S. 641
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Respondents, enrolled Coeur d’Alene Indians, were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of burglary, robbery, and murder of a non-Indian within the boundaries of their reservation. One respondent was convicted of second-degree murder only; the other two were convicted of all three crimes as charged, including first-degree murder under the felony murder provisions of the federal enclave murder statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1111, as made applicable to Indians by the Major Crimes Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1153. The Court of Appeals reversed on the ground that respondents had been denied their constitutional rights under the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. The court agreed with respondents’ contention that their felony murder convictions were racially discriminatory, since a non-Indian charged with the same crime would have been subject to prosecution only under Idaho law, under which premeditation and deliberation would have had to be proved, whereas no such elements were required under the felony murder provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 1111.
Held: Respondent Indians were not deprived of the equal protection of the laws. Pp. 645-650.
(a) The federal criminal statutes enforced here are based neither in whole nor in part upon impermissible racial classifications. Federal regulation of Indian tribes is rooted in the unique status of Indians as "a separate people" with their own political institutions, and is not to be viewed as legislation of a "`racial’ group consisting of `Indians.’ . . ." Morton v. Mancari, 417 U.S. 535, 553 n. 24. Pp. 645-647.
(b) The challenged statutes do not otherwise violate equal protection. Respondents were subjected to the same body of law as any other individuals, Indian or non-Indian, charged with first-degree murder committed in a federal enclave. Congress has undoubted power to prescribe a criminal code applicable to Indian country, and the disparity between federal law and Idaho law has no equal protection or other constitutional significance. Pp. 647-650.
523 F.2d 400, reversed and remanded.
BURGER, C.J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977) in 430 U.S. 641 430 U.S. 642. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9X8KMFMJ8I8X8IV.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977), in 430 U.S. 641, page 430 U.S. 642. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9X8KMFMJ8I8X8IV.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in United States v. Antelope, 430 U.S. 641 (1977). cited in 1977, 430 U.S. 641, pp.430 U.S. 642. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=9X8KMFMJ8I8X8IV.
|