Three Indians were struck from the jury during voir dire in United States v. Harding, including one who was struck because he was struck in a prior case. And that’s okay under federal law, apparently:
The prosecutor gave these reasons for the strikes: He said that Lacroix worked with Harding at Dakota Paneling, where Lacroix was a supervisor, and that Lacroix knew Harding. He stated that Cottier was a registered nurse and was a member of a venire in the recent case of United States v. High Wolf. In response to questions from the court, the prosecutor clarified that Cottier had been excused from service in High Wolf, and that the prosecutor was drawing on Cottier’s responses during voir dire in the past.
Turtle Talk 
Not only should Natives be allowed or even preferred on a federal jury, but if the prosecution proceeds under 25 USC sections 1152 or 1153 (perhaps others), the jury should be required to be from the same Native Nation. This goes beyond the notion of a ‘jury of peers’, although that notion should dictate fellow Native jurors. But those statues have been deemed constitutional because of the political status of the defendant; that same political status should be required of the jury to justify the application of the statute and the entire prosecutorial proceeding.