October Term 2002 · Docket 02-281
Do tribal lands block state search warrants?
Inyo County seeks to search tribal property for crime evidence. The tribe claims immunity from such orders.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Kirby argued the tribe seeks a categorical rule for immunity.
He claimed this rule would shield tribal property from state warrants.
He stated this immunity would cover casinos and commercial businesses.
He noted this rule would block state crime investigations and prosecutions.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 1-3 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 1-3
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether state law enforcement can execute search warrants on tribal land. The county argues it needs access to investigate crimes. The tribe argues its property is immune from state process.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on March 31, 2003.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 1-3 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 1-3
What each side wants
Inyo County wants to execute state search warrants on tribal property.
The tribe wants a rule that blocks state search warrants on its land.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
What each side says
The county argues state law must apply to criminal investigations on tribal land.
The tribe argues its property is immune from state search warrants and subpoenas.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
What the justices asked
Does the tribe seek a categorical rule for immunity from state process?
What problems arise from the tribe's proposed categorical rule?
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 1-3 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 1-3
Why it matters
This dispute defines the reach of state criminal law on tribal land. It determines whether tribes can block state evidence collection. It shapes the balance between tribal sovereignty and state law enforcement.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 5-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 5-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 56, lines 1-3 — Transcript, file page 56, lines 1-3
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 21, lines 25-3 — Transcript, file page 21, lines 25-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 31, lines 11-15 — Transcript, file page 31, lines 11-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 52, lines 17-7 — Transcript, file page 52, lines 17-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 53, lines 9-41 — Transcript, file page 53, lines 9-41
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.