Ex parte Crow Dog, 109 U.S. 556 (1883), is a landmark[1][2] decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that followed the death of one member of a Native American tribe at the hands of another on reservation land.

The tribal council dealt with the incident according to Sioux tradition, and Crow Dog paid restitution to the dead man's family.

[14] On August 5, 1881, Crow Dog shot and killed Spotted Tail,[fn 6] who was the uncle of Oglala Lakota war leader Crazy Horse.

[22] It was believed that the killing occurred that day as the result of Crow Dog and Spotted Tail meeting, both armed, and mistaking the other man's intentions.

[25] This version makes no mention of another man's wife being the reason for the killing, and states that Crow Dog ambushed Spotted Tail to gain power in the tribe.

In either case, the matter was settled within the tribe, following longstanding tribal custom, by Crow Dog making a restitution payment of $600,[fn 7] eight horses, and one blanket to Spotted Tail's family.

[28] Following the killing and the settlement under tribal customs, the Indian agent had Crow Dog arrested and taken to Fort Niobrara, Nebraska.

[32] The court appointed A. J. Plowman to represent Crow Dog,[33] who claimed that he had been punished and made reparations according to the customs of the Brulé Sioux tribe.

In an unusual move for a death penalty case, Moody released Crow Dog, allowing him to go home pending his appeal to the territorial Supreme Court.

Matthews rejected the contention of the United States that the 1868 Treaty of Fort Laramie implicitly repealed the exceptions to prosecution.

In a clear evocation of the principle of tribal sovereignty,[50] Matthews stated: It tries them, not by their peers, nor by the customs of their people, nor the law of their land, but by superiors of a different race, according to the law of a social state of which they have an imperfect conception, and which is opposed to the traditions of their history, to the habits of their lives, to the strongest prejudices of their savage nature; one which measures the red man's revenge by the maxims of the white man's morality.

[52] Shocked by the Supreme Court's decision and under strong pressure from the BIA,[53] Congress passed the Major Crimes Act in response.

[fn 15][55] The Major Crimes Act placed seven serious felony offenses (with amendments over the years, now fifteen) under the jurisdiction of the federal government.

[fn 18][63] The younger Spotted Tail was also confined pending murder charges, and it took a direct order of the Secretary of the Interior for the local BIA agents to comply with the Supreme Court decision before he was released.

Of course, our method of dealing with that was Crow Dog should go take care of Spotted Tail's family, and if he didn't do that we'd banish him from the tribe.

But that was considered too barbaric, and thought perhaps we should hang him like civilized people do, so they passed the Major Crimes Act that said we don't know how to handle murderers and they were going to show us.

First, Justice Matthews had noted that under Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, (1831)[71] the Brulé tribe had a right to its own law in Indian country.

[72] Part of this ruling was based on American constitutional tradition – at that time, not all Indians were U.S. citizens[fn 19] and according to Matthews did not have a "voice in the selection of representatives and the framing of the laws.

[78] The power of these courts was limited to minor crimes with a maximum punishment of a $5,000 fine and imprisonment of no more than one year[79] until the passage of the Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010.