The question presented by Elon Yallup in this felony driving under the influence (DUI) case was, can the state enforce the implied consent laws against an enrolled member of the Yakama Nation driving on state highways on the reservation? The conclusion is that the implied consent statute is primarily a criminal statute rather than a civil regulatory statute as that distinction is applied by the United States Supreme Court in cases interpreting Public Law 280. In English that means, no you can’t drive drunk on any road but your own personal property in the United States.
The Court found that requiring Mr. Yallup to drive with a valid license and without being impaired by alcohol or drugs did not impede his right to travel. While he needed to be licensed and sober in order to exercise his right to use the roads “in common with” other citizens of the United States, he was free to travel by other methods if he did not want to live up to those obligations. He could travel as a passenger in a motor vehicle (which was his claim at trial), on public transit, or on alternative transportation. If he chose to drive, he was subject to the same restrictions imposed on all people using the roadways.
The right to travel guaranteed by the treaty with the Yakama Nation did not exempt Mr. Yallup from the criminal statutes governing use of the roadways. He was subject to the licensing and nonimpaired driving requirements. The treaty did not bar the criminal prosecution of this case.
Rule of Yallup – All who use the public roadways are subject to the public laws governing the roads.
State v. Elon Alex Yallup, Court of Appeals of Washington Division III. No. 28040-3-III, (March 2011)