Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 3073
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 2
- Policy Area
- Native Americans
- Status
- Passed House
- Latest Action
- 2026-03-17: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-11T23:26:41Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act aims to clarify legal jurisdiction over civil disputes involving the Shivwits Band of Paiutes (a federally recognized Indian tribe in Utah) on their Indian lands. It seeks to enable the State of Utah to handle certain civil cases, provide federal court access for contract-related disputes, and expand the tribe's authority to lease its lands, promoting smoother business and legal interactions while preserving tribal sovereignty.
Key Provisions
- Definitions:
- "Indian lands" refers to lands held in trust by the U.S. for the Shivwits Band or restricted from sale by the U.S.
- "Shivwits Band of Paiutes" includes the tribe itself, its governing body, tribal businesses or enterprises, and any corporations it charters under federal law (specifically the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934).
- State Civil Jurisdiction (Section 3): Utah state courts gain authority over civil lawsuits where the Shivwits Band is a party and the dispute arises on or within the tribe's Indian lands.
- Federal Court Jurisdiction (Section 4):
- Contracts, leases, or agreements involving the tribe's Indian lands or the tribe itself are treated as part of "commerce" under federal arbitration law (9 U.S.C. § 1), allowing arbitration enforcement.
- Disputes from these contracts are considered to arise under federal law (28 U.S.C. § 1331), giving U.S. federal courts jurisdiction as "federal question" cases.
- Preservation of Sovereign Immunity (Section 5): The act does not remove the tribe's sovereign immunity (its legal protection from lawsuits without consent) or limit its ability to voluntarily waive that immunity.
- Leasing Authority Expansion (Section 6): Amends the Act of August 9, 1955 (25 U.S.C. § 415(a)), to explicitly allow the Shivwits Band to lease its trust lands for up to 99 years, similar to other specified tribes.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Introduces state jurisdiction over civil actions on tribal lands involving the Shivwits Band, which typically fall under exclusive tribal or federal authority under U.S. Indian law principles (e.g., Public Law 83-280 does not currently apply to Utah tribes in this way).
- Classifies tribal land contracts as interstate "commerce" for federal arbitration purposes, bypassing potential limitations on applying the Federal Arbitration Act to purely intrastate or tribal matters.
- Grants automatic federal question jurisdiction for contract disputes, shifting some cases from state or tribal courts to federal ones without needing diversity of citizenship (different state residencies of parties).
- Adds the Shivwits Band to the list of tribes eligible for long-term land leasing under federal law, removing prior ambiguity for their trust lands.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The U.S. Department of the Interior (via the Bureau of Indian Affairs) may see reduced administrative burden in overseeing tribal leases, as the Shivwits Band gains clearer leasing powers; federal courts could handle more contract cases, potentially increasing caseloads.
- On Citizens and Businesses: Non-tribal individuals or companies dealing with the Shivwits Band (e.g., in leases or commercial activities) may find disputes easier to resolve in familiar state or federal courts, encouraging economic development on tribal lands; tribal members retain protections via sovereign immunity.
- On International Relations: No direct impact, as this is a domestic U.S. tribal matter.
- Overall, it could boost economic activity on Shivwits lands by reducing jurisdictional uncertainties that deter investment.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Shivwits Band of Paiutes: Gains leasing flexibility and federal court access for contracts but must navigate shared state jurisdiction for civil suits.
- State of Utah: Assumes new role in adjudicating civil disputes on tribal lands, potentially expanding state court involvement in Indian country.
- U.S. Federal Government: Through agencies like the Bureau of Indian Affairs and federal courts, it facilitates clearer legal frameworks without altering core trust responsibilities.
- Businesses and Non-Tribal Parties: Entities entering contracts or leases with the tribe benefit from predictable dispute resolution mechanisms.
- Other Utah Tribes: May influence future negotiations for similar jurisdictional clarity, as this sets a precedent for specific tribes.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces tribal sovereignty by explicitly not waiving immunity, aligning with Supreme Court precedents (e.g., Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 1978) that limit congressional interference in tribal affairs; however, it partially extends state authority into Indian country, which could be challenged if seen as violating the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8) or federal trust obligations.
- Constitutional: Balances federal plenary power over Indian affairs (U.S. Const. art. I, § 8) with state interests, avoiding broader abrogation of tribal rights; the federal question provision ensures consistency with the Supremacy Clause by prioritizing federal oversight in commerce-related disputes.
- Political: Represents targeted congressional action for a restored tribe (under the 1980 Paiute Restoration Act), potentially fostering goodwill between the Shivwits Band, Utah, and federal officials; it may encourage similar bills for other tribes facing jurisdictional hurdles, amid ongoing debates on tribal economic self-determination versus state expansion.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (2)
Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4]
Recent Actions
- 2026-03-17: Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs.
- 2026-03-16: Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- 2026-03-16: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2515)
- 2026-03-16: Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2515)
- 2026-03-16: DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3073.
- 2026-03-16: Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2514-2516)
- 2026-03-16: Mr. Wittman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 2026-02-23: Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 440.
- 2026-02-23: Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-514.
- 2026-02-23: Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-514.
- 2026-01-22: Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent.
- 2026-01-22: Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- 2026-01-22: Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs Discharged
- 2025-05-20: Subcommittee Hearings Held
- 2025-05-13: Referred to the Subcommittee on Indian and Insular Affairs.
Bill Versions
- Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act — issued 2026-03-16 — PDF (6 pages)
- Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act — issued 2025-04-29 — PDF (4 pages)
- Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act — issued 2026-03-17 — PDF (4 pages)
- Shivwits Band of Paiutes Jurisdictional Clarity Act — issued 2026-02-23 — PDF (6 pages)