Jurisdiction Boundary Marking Act



This proposed federal act has not yet been introduced. Readers are

urged to support doing so.



Introduction



The Constitution, in Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 17 prescribes that the U.S.

Congress shall have exclusive legislative jurisdiction only over parcels of

territory ceded to them by an act of a state legislature. An inventory of

such parcels was taken and reported in a 1956 report entitled

Jurisdiction over Federal Areas within the States. Many federal statutes,

including most criminal statutes, apply only within the boundaries of such

parcels, which are sometimes referred to as "federal enclaves", but few

such enclaves have their boundaries marked to give persons due notice

of the jurisdiction into which they are entering. This creates an issue of

whether such jurisdiction may be legitimately exercised, in the absence of

such notice. The proposed act would remedy this deficiency.



Proposed provisions



     Within 180 days of the enactment of this act, each official with

     administrative authority over any federal enclave established under

     Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 17 shall mark the boundaries of such enclave

     with appropriate markers, and with signs which identify the

     boundary, showing which side is under federal jurisdiction, and

     which under state jurisdiction, and warning a person crossing the

     boundary of which jurisdiction he is entering. 



     If such enclave is not marked as prescribed above within 180

     days of enactment, or if, having been thus marked, the markings

     are removed, or not adequately maintained for more than 90

     days, federal jurisdiction will terminate and revert to the state from

     which it was ceded. 



     The boundary of such enclave shall not be marked unless and until

     the responsible official has:

        1.Determined that the federal government has clear title to the

          property, as evidenced by a recorded deed, specifying the

          metes and bounds of the property. 

        2.Determined that an official, certified copy of the act of the

          state legislature that consented to the purchase or

          ownership of the property, and ceded jurisdiction thereto,

          has been filed with the U.S. Department of State, and that

          such act specifically defined the property ceded by a metes

          and bounds description. 

        3.Determined that a declaration of acceptance of jurisdiction

          by the U.S. federal government has been duly issued,

          signed by the President or the Secretary of State, conveyed

          to the ceding state legislature or state official designated by

          state law, and filed with the Secretary of State. 

        4.Identified the boundary markers of a survey of the

          property, or had the property re-surveyed if they cannot be

          found. 



     The appropriate markers shall depend on the nature of the terrain,

     but may include:

        1.A painted stripe or engraved line. 

        2.A fence or wall. 

        3.A natural obstacle, such as a river or cliff face. 

        4.Any other boundary marker in common use to clearly

          identify property lines. 



     The signs shall be placed so that anyone entering the enclave

     along any route will be able to see one under normal daytime

     lighting conditions. 



Argument



     The markers and signs would provide the duly required notice of

     jurisdiction to persons, without which they cannot be justly

     prosecuted, and which would help clarify which courts and

     statutes would have jurisdiction in all civil and criminal cases. 



     The markers and signs would duly inform state and federal

     officials of the boundaries of their respective jurisdictions. 



     The markers and signs would stimulate the public to become

     better informed about the differences between federal and state

     jurisdiction and enable them to make better decisions about their

     conduct within each. 



     The requirement would operate to remove legal ambiguities and

     impairments to federal and state jurisdictions, and thereby avoid

     illegitimate official actions and reduce litigation over such

     ambiguities and impairments.