from learning and practicing time-honored ways of artisanship that were an important cultural heritage. S. Rep. No. 106-452, at 1-2. And “[wjith Native communities plagued by unemployment and stagnant economies, the flood of fake Indian arts and crafts is decimating one of the few forms of entrepreneurship and economic development on Indian reservations.” Id. The IACA, as enacted in 1990, conferred a private right of action on Indian tribes and individual tribe members, who could both sue on behalf of themselves or on behalf of an Indian arts and crafts organization. See Pub.L. No. 101-644, 104 Stat. 4662 (1990). But there was no right of action for an Indian arts and crafts organization itself. See, e.g., Native Am. Arts, Inc. v. J.C. Penney Co., 5 F.Supp.2d 599, 604 (N.D.Ill.1998) (<HOLDING>). In 2000, Congress amended the statute to,
holding that state has no jurisdiction over civil suit by nonindian against indian where cause of action arises on indian reservation holding federal government could not prosecute an american indian who on indian territory had murdered another member of his tribe as federal statute excluded such crime from federal criminal jurisdiction in favor of allowing the indians to engage in selfgovernment ie the regulation by themselves of their own domestic affairs the maintenance of order and peace among their own members by the administration of their own laws and customs recognizing the federal responsibility to indian people and finding that congress has assumed the responsibility for the protection and preservation of indian tribes and their resources none of which is more vital  than their children holding that oklahoma police officer was without jurisdiction to arrest indian inside indian reservation when the state has neither received by express grant nor acted pursuant to congressional authorization to assume criminal jurisdiction over indian country holding that the iaca prevents indian arts and crafts organizations from suing in their own right