The author explains that there are two types of jurisdictions (regulatory and adjudicatory) and four kinds of adjudicatory jurisdictions (territory, status, subject matter, and personal) in “Indian country.” It is important for victim advocates to understand these jurisdictional distinctions in order to better assist the people within these jurisdictions. Regulatory jurisdiction occurs when a tribal body passes a law that regulates certain activities within “Indian country.” However, when there is already a law in place, adjudicatory jurisdictions is the power of a given body to uphold the law. The author explains that within this adjudicatory jurisdiction, there are four types of jurisdiction that involve the territory, the status of the person involved, the subject of the dispute, and how you call the person into court to answer to the dispute. Each of these four aspects is explained in greater detail in the remainder of the presentation. For example, they explain that most of the legal principles of jurisdiction fall within aspects of territorial questions. The author goes on to discuss the fact that Indian Nation leaders are upset about jurisdictional challenges going to the Federal court without an Indian court or other agency having actual facts to rule on in terms of jurisdictional issues. Too many cases end up in Federal courts that rightly belong within Indian courts.