In Maricopa, Is Watching a Movie a Trade-off for Your Rights?

A recent incident at the Ak-Chin Indian Community cinema has raised questions about the jurisdiction of tribal authorities over non-Indians. The U.S. Supreme Court has established that tribes generally lack authority over non-Indians engaged in activities on non-Indian-owned lands. However, within reservations like Ak-Chin and Gila River, which own all the land, non-Indians face increased tribal control and diminished legal transparency.

On September 19, Progressive Insurance sought an unredacted police report from the Gila River Police Department (GRPD) regarding a car crash near Sacaton Road and Canal Street. Five days later, the case was dismissed by Judge Joseph R. Georgini due to procedural issues surrounding the service of the lawsuit. Such a situation, typically straightforward outside of reservations, becomes complicated within tribal lands where non-Indians have limited rights.

Access to GRIC lands is heavily regulated. Non-Indians may only traverse through main roads or visit public businesses unless otherwise permitted. This can complicate matters for residents from nearby areas like Maricopa, who frequently visit tribal lands for leisure activities like gambling or dining, only to find few avenues for legal recourse or information following incidents.

In May, the Ak-Chin Police Department failed to comment on a violent confrontation at its cinema, where footage emerged showing one individual being brutally attacked. Despite the video gaining significant attention online, the police did not provide any updates or information. Similarly, in July, two teenage girls were assaulted outside the same theater, with one suffering severe injuries. Concerned families, like that of Ron Tankamnerd, are left in the dark regarding any potential arrests or accountability.

Professor Robert J. Miller of Arizona State University, an authority on Indian law, highlights the imbalance in legal jurisdiction. Referencing the 1981 Montana v. U.S., he notes that courts have acknowledged tribes’ authority over non-Indians if their actions impact tribal welfare. Many unwitting individuals engaging with tribal lands may not fully understand the implications of tribal laws.

The Ak-Chin Community Council reinforces this perspective, asserting that its sovereign status mandates compliance with community laws by anyone entering its territory. This includes both tribal and non-tribal members. In contrast, representatives from the Gila River Indian Community remained unavailable for comment on these jurisdictional issues.

The GRPD operates under a mutual aid agreement with the Pinal County Sheriff’s Office for pursuit situations that involve tribal suspects. While the FBI handles serious crimes on reservations, tribal police often manage less severe offenses within their jurisdiction. Legal frameworks, such as the Violence Against Women Act, empower tribes to prosecute domestic violence cases involving non-Indians, but extend limited criminal jurisdiction otherwise.

Aside from law enforcement, tribes possess taxation powers within their territories, with both Ak-Chin and Gila River imposing a 7% sales tax. Additionally, the inherent civil authority of tribal police can create conflicts for non-Indians who are unaware of tribal laws, highlighting a critical gap in information and understanding for those engaging with tribal entities.