With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". entering Indian reservations. We recognize that in general, “[f]ederal protection of tribal self-government precludes either criminal or civil jurisdiction of state courts over Indians or their property absent the consent of Congress.” Felix S. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law 349 (1982 ed.). However, “at times Congress has retained Indian country status but has delegated partial jurisdiction to states over areas of Indian country or over specific legal subjects.” Id. at 361. Such a Congressional delegation of jurisdiction has occurred in Kansas. 18 U.S.C. § 3243 (the “Kansas Act”) grants the state of Kansas “jurisdiction over all crimes committed by or against Indians on Indian reservations.” See Negonsott v. Samuels, 507 U.S. 99, 105, 113 S.Ct. 1119, 1123, 122 L.Ed.2d 457 (1993) (<HOLDING>); Oyler v. Allenbrand, 23 F.3d 292, 295 (10th

A: holding that state of south dakota does not have criminal jurisdiction over indians in indian country
B: recognizing the inherent power of indian tribes  to exercise criminal jurisdiction over all indians
C: holding that the kansas act unambiguously confers jurisdiction on kansas to prosecute all offenses  major and minor  committed by or against indians on indian reservations in accordance with state law
D: holding that because congress enacted the kansas act to confer criminal jurisdiction over all indians in kansas indian selling cigarettes on an indian reservation was subject to ksa  793321 and 793322
C.