ESTABLISHED IN 1884, THE RED LAKE COURT OPERATES OVER A JURISDICTION LIMITED BY RACE AND GEOGRAPHY ON A CODE OF INDIAN OFFENSES LAST REVISED IN 1952. THE COURT MAY DEAL ONLY WITH CRIMES COMMITTED BY INDIANS ON THE RESERVATION; IT IS SERVED BY THREE JUDGES, WHOSE APPOINTMENTS DEPEND ON TRIBAL POLITICS AND THE AVAILABILITY OF BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS (BIA) FUNDS. BESIDES INADEQUATE SALARIES, THE JUDGES' PERFORMANCE IS FLAWED BY A LACK OF EDUCATION, FAILURE TO GRASP LEGAL CONCEPTS AND ABSENCE OF KNOWLEDGE OF TRIBAL CUSTOMS. THE COURT LACKS INDEPENDENCE AND IS SUBJECTED TO BIA AND LOCAL POLITICAL PRESSURES. MOREOVER, THE RED LAKE COURT IS NOT A COURT OF RECORD; THUS, IT CANNOT BE GUIDED BY PRECEDENT. IN PRACTICE, THERE IS NO APPEALS SYSTEM, DUE PROCESS, ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS, OR FEDERAL REVIEW. ABOVE ALL, THERE IS NEARLY TOTAL APATHY TOWARD THE COURT FROM THE BIA, TRIBAL OFFICIALS, THE FEDERAL BUREAUCRACY, AND MEMBERS OF THE TRIBE. TWO CASE STUDIES EXEMPLIFY THE INABILITY OF THE RED LAKE COURT TO EFFECT JUSTICE. PROVISIONS OF THE INDIAN BILL OF RIGHTS ACT OF 1968 ENUMERATE SPECIFIC RIGHTS THAT ARE NOT TO BE ABRIDGED BY TRIBAL GOVERNMENT. TO COMPLY WITH THIS LAW, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE EXISTING COURT BE REPLACED BY AN ENTIRELY NEW COURT. THIS NEW COURT SHOULD BE INDEPENDENT OF BIA AND TRIBAL PRESSURE GROUPS AND HAVE INCREASED JURISDICTION OVER TRIBAL AND FEDERAL OFFENSES, PLUS SUFFICIENT AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE JUDGMENTS. FOOTNOTES ARE NOT INCLUDED. (MRK)