United States v. Quiver

Background

This case arose from a prosecution for adultery occurring on a Sioux Indian Reservation. Both people involved were members of that reservation. The criminal charge was brought under a federal statute originally adopted in 1887 and now codified as § 316 of the Penal Code. The District Court held that the federal law did not apply, and the question before this Court was whether Congress intended that statute to reach adultery committed by one Indian with another on a reservation.

Reasoning

The Court examined Congress’s long-standing practice of leaving the personal and domestic relations of Indians to tribal customs and laws. It noted earlier statutes and the decision in Ex parte Crow Dog, which treated crimes by one Indian against another as matters for tribal authority. Congress later listed certain serious crimes (murder, rape, arson, burglary, larceny, and similar offenses) as federally punishable when committed by one Indian against another, but it did not include adultery or related domestic offenses. The Government argued a literal reading would allow federal prosecution for adultery. The Court rejected that approach, saying the statutory exception should be read in light of Congress’s intent to leave Indian-on-Indian domestic matters to tribal control and that applying the adultery statute without clear congressional direction would be inconsistent and unreasonable.

Real world impact

The Court affirmed the judgment, so the federal adultery statute does not reach adultery between two reservation members here. That means adultery and similar family or sexual matters among reservation members remain subject to tribal law and administration unless Congress clearly says otherwise. Prosecutors cannot rely on the cited federal statute to prosecute such conduct on the reservation.