Tribal Nations United States Relations: Policy Eras and Future Developments

Similar documents
Why Treaties Matter: Sovereignty and Existence

2008 SAIGE Annual Training Conference "Blessed by Tradition: Honoring Our Ancestors Through Government Service"

History: Present

Business Management Curriculum

Copyright 2010 by Washington Law Review Association

Week 1 OUTLINE. INTRODUCTION: Indian Country (Week 1 reading, Introduction from SNN/aka: State of Native Nations)

CHAMORRO TRIBE I Chamorro Na Taotaogui IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR NATIVE CHAMORROS

A Correlation of. To the. Idaho Content Standards Social Studies Grade 4

History Rewritten. Presenters: Tish Keahna Kruzan and Lisa Skenandore #WICSEC2018 1

Idaho Content Standards for Social Studies. Grade 4

Indian Nations, Tribal Sovereignty, and Tribal Government

Justices for the Court: Garbriel Duvall, William Johnson, Chief Justice John Marshall, John McLean, Joseph Story, Smith Thompson

INSTRUCTIONS FOR FILLING OUT & SIGNING PETITION. These instructions are very simple, but please follow accordingly.

Expanding Tribal Citizenship Using International Principles of Self Determination. Jancita C. Warrington B.A., Haskell Indian Nations University, 2002

Indian Reorganization Era The Indian New Deal

11/16/10. [1] U. S. Constitution, Article II, 2, Cl. 2.

By Angelique EagleWoman* (Wambdi A. WasteWin) **

The Indian Reorganization (W'heeler-Howard Act) June 18, 1934

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

IN THE UNITED STATES: A PRESSING NEED TO DEVELOP TRIBAL ECONOMIES REGAINING SOVEREIGNTY OVER OUR LAND

Sec. 4 A New Era of Trust.

Due Diligence in Business Transactions with Tribal Governments and Enterprises

Presented by Marsha Harlan, Esq, Kara Whitworth, Director of Cherokee Nation Child Support Services TRIBAL IV-D 101- FOR STATES

Regulatory Jurisdiction on Indian Reservations in Montana

Ch. 6 & Ch. 7 Test Review COPY OR ADD TO YOUR ANSWERS SO YOU HAVE THE CORRECT INFORMATION TO STUDY FOR YOUR TEST.

RANCHERIA ACT OF AUGUST 18, 1958

Did You Know? Facts About Treaties Between the United States and Native Nations

Native American Tribes, Law, and Planning

Standing Rock, the Sioux Treaties, and the Limits of the Supremacy Clause

1. Maintain a governmental relationship with Federally Recognized tribal governments. Section One of this book is The Governmental Relationship.

104 FERC 61,108 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION. 18 CFR Part 2. (Docket No. PL ; Order No.

Natural Resources Journal

Insuring Title to Indian Lands. David A. Green, Underwriting Counsel Stewart Title Guaranty Company

NADCP 19th Annual Training Conference July 15, 2013 Washington, D.C. Collaboration between Sovereigns

AMC 2016 Track A Session 5 Jurisdiction on Tribal Lands

RESERVATION OF RIGHTS A look at Indian land claims in Ohio for gaming purposes. By Keith H. Raker

Wyoming s Big Horn River Adjudication

Public Law as Amended by the Tribal Law and Order Act July 29, 2010

The Constitution of the United States Applies to Indian Tribes

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Montana Land and Water Alliance, Inc P.O. Box 1061 Polson, Montana

US Code (Unofficial compilation from the Legal Information Institute) TITLE 25 - INDIANS CHAPTER 16 DISTRIBUTION OF JUDGMENT FUNDS

By John Petoskey, General Counsel Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa Indians. Great Lakes Tribal Economic Development Symposium

CHOATE V. TRAPP 224 U.S. 665 (1912)

Native Americans of the Great Plains

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Chapter 8:THE ERA OF GOOD FEELINGS:

The Federal Trust Doctrine. What does it mean for DoD?

THE PYRAMID LAKE PAIUTE TRIBE IS CONSIDERING TO AMEND ITS TRIBAL CONSTITUTION

Case 4:18-cv DCN Document 1 Filed 06/26/18 Page 1 of 65

Justice Rehnquist s Theory of Indian Law: The Evolution from Mazurie to Atkinson Where Did He Leave the Court? Brenna Willott 1

Case 1:08-cv EJL Document 12 Filed 04/06/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF IDAHO

State Jurisdiction in Indian Country

Native Communities - Sociology 3270

No The Supreme Court of the United States. State of Oregon, Petitioner. Thomas Captain, Respondent and cross-petitioner

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Manifest Destiny: A Comparison of the Constitutional Status of Indian Tribes and U.S. Overseas Territories

October 18th, 2001, Cœur d Alene, Idaho Gene Straughan, Lewis-Clark State College

Unit I Flashcards. C h a p t e r s 1 7 a n d 1 8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Circuit Court, N. D. New York. November 12, 1890.

Indigenous Governance Law Law B584 A, B, C - 4 Credits Fall T and TH 3:30-5:20 PM William H. Gates Hall Room 118

CAL/EPA POLICY MEMORANDUM NUMBER:

Case at a Glance. Can the Secretary of the Interior Take Land Into Trust for a Rhode Island Indian Tribe Recognized in 1983?

TIGER V. WESTERN INV. CO. 221 U.S. 286 (1911)

White Paper of the Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation On The American Indian Empowerment Act of 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

Fort McDermitt Paiute and Shoshone Tribe

Tribal Nations in Montana Draft This page intentionally left blank.

American Indian Policy: Assimilation or Nation States? High School H-6

History of Indian hunting and fishing rights as they pertain to the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes and the Hellgate Treaty of 1855

Introduction. Native Peoples Pre-Contact 1. Intro/Historical Overview - Econ. of NA - RIT - Dr. Jeffrey Burnette

The Dann Case Before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: A Summary of the Commission s Report and its Significance for Indian Land Rights

Tribal Nations. United States AN INTRODUCTION AND THE

The Honorable Barack Obama President of the United States of America The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20500

The Governmental Context for Development in Indian Country: Modern Tribal Institutions and the Bureau of Indian Affairs

The Trust Doctrine: A Source of Protection for Native American Sacred Sites

STATE OF OREGON, Petitioner,

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. STATE OF OREGON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. THOMAS CAPTAIN, Defendant-Appellee.

Rice v. Cayetano: The Supreme Court Declines to Extend Federal Indian Law Principles to Native Hawaiians Sovereign Rights 1. Jeanette Wolfley 2

Order in the Courts: Resolution of Tribal/State Criminal Jurisdictional Disputes

Funds Provided to American Indians/Alaska Natives that are Excluded by Law

Earl Barbry, Chairman Tunica-Biloxi Tribe of Louisiana and Chair, USET Carcieri Task Force. On behalf of the United South and Eastern Tribes, Inc.

Developing Work Agreements with Tribal Populations

Working Effectively with Indian Tribes: Communication, Collaboration, Coordination, and Consultation, 2017

American History: A Survey Chapter 16: The Conquest of the Far West

WRITING WILLS FOR TRIBAL CLIENTS

Doctrine of Discovery

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Case 2:08-cv TS Document 97 Filed 11/16/10 Page 1 of 11 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH CENTRAL DIVISION

Supreme Court of the United States

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES STATE OF OREGON, THOMAS CAPTAIN, ON WRIT OF CRITIORARI TO THE OREGON COURT OF APPEALS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN GREEN BAY DIVISION

Erosion of Tribal Sovereignty by the U.S. Supreme Court under Justice Rehnquist ( ) Creating Chaos

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. MADISON COUNTY and ONEIDA COUNTY, NEW YORK, v. ONEIDA INDIAN NATION OF NEW YORK,

TRIBAL SUPREME COURT PROJECT MEMORANDUM

Frontier Grant Lesson Plan

The Supreme Court of the United States. State of Oregon, Appellant/Petitioner, Thomas Captain, Appellee/Respondent. On writ of certiorari to the

Lone Wolf vs Hitchcock SCOTUS FILES

Transcription:

Tribal Nations United States Relations: Policy Eras and Future Developments Angelique Townsend EagleWoman (Wambdi A. WasteWin) James E. Rogers Fellow in American Indian Law Associate Professor of Law University of Idaho College of Law

Tribal Nation Commerce Historically Estimated Trade Routes, Carl Waldman, Atlas of the North American Indian, rev. ed. Pg. 67

Indian Country Defined in U.S. Law 18 U.S.C. 1151 (Criminal Statute part of Major Crimes Act): Except as otherwise provided in sections 1152 and 1156 of this title, the term Indian country, as used in this chapter, means (a) all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent, and, including rights-of-way running through the reservation, (b) all dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States whether within the original or subsequently acquired territory thereof, and whether within or without the limits of a state, and (c) all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished, including rights-of-way running through the same. Indian Country = three categories 1)Reservations, 2) Trust/restricted lands/allotments, and 3) Dependent Indian communities (under federal supervision, similar to the Pueblos)

Native American Law Tribal Nation Law - Tribal Legislation forming Tribal Legal Codes - Tribal regulations - Tribal Judicial Opinions - Tribal Customs, Norms, and Traditional Practices - Evolving International Indigenous Law U.S. Federal Indian Law - U.S. Congress legislation forming 25 U.S.C. - U.S. federal and state judicial opinions - U.S. federal agency, Bureau of Indian Affairs, policies and regulations - U.S. executive orders from the U.S. President

Eras of U.S. Indian Policy Sovereign-to-sovereign (1778 to 1871) Removal (1830-1887) Reservation (1830-1887) Assimilation (1887-1934) Indian Self-Government (1934 - late 1940s) Termination (1950 late 1960s) Indian Self-determination (1970s to present)

Tribal Relations and the U.S. Constitution Article I & II: granted the U.S. President and Congress authority to declare war and make treaties. Supremacy clause states that treaties are part of the supreme law of the land. Art. VI clause 2 Article I section 8 clause 3 gave Congress sole authority to regulate commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. Original Art. I section 2 clause 3 provided a formula for taxation and contained the language: excluding Indians not taxed. Recognition that Tribal Nations were separate entities with their own governance engaging in commerce with the United States.

Early U.S. Indian/Tribal Policy Non-Intercourse Acts periodically renewed, prevent land sales to private individuals or states, licensed Indian traders, traveling through tribal territory required a passport Sovereign-to-sovereign era involved diplomatic relations with Tribal Nations identified as most important Two contradictory policies: 1) enter into treaty relations with Tribal Nations owning their lands (International approach to create alliances) and 2) federal gov t should assimilate tribal members into mainstream citizen farmers (Roman Empire idea of conquest )

History in Oregon/Washington/Idaho Territory for current Idaho area Tribes Removal/Reservation Eras 1830-1887 Stevens Treaties with Nez Perce Tribe in 1855 and with Salish & Kootenai in Montana in 1855 impacting Kootenai Tribe of Idaho. Series of Treaties with Shoshone, Bannocks, and Lemhi - Fort Bridger Treaties ratified in 1863 and 1868. Executive Orders post-1871 House Rider led to establishment of Coeur d Alene Reservation and the Shoshone-Paiute Tribes Duck Valley Reservation. Northwestern Band of the Shoshone Nation federally recognized April 29, 1987 with tribal offices. Land base and trust status impacted by 2009 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Carcieri v. Salazar.

The Marshall Trilogy: U.S. Supreme Court Decisions Johnson v. McIntosh (1823)= Tribes have the right only to occupancy of their lands because of the doctrine of discovery through which the U.S. gained the exclusive right to purchase title or acquire by conquest from the Tribes as successor to Britain Cherokee Nation cases: 1) Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)= domestic dependent nations /wardguardian language, not foreign nation, Federal trust responsibility origins, 2) Worcester v. Georgia (1832) = Georgia laws illegal in Cherokee territory, federal pre-emption in Indian affairs, states are component of federal government

Tribal Nation general view on relations with the U.S. Treaty-based or agreement based relationship between sovereigns Encroachment of the states comprising the U.S. Owed just compensation for lands and resources taken, ceded, or negotiated over and owed treaty/agreement compensation for services promised (health, education, schools, roads, etc.) Must deal with slow moving federal bureaucracy due to federal laws and policies Interests not represented within the U.S. government and rarely portrayed accurately in U.S. media Refusal to assimilate and deny identity or nationhood

Allotment, Assimilation and Abrogation of Treaties : 1887-1934 General Allotment Act of 1887 (Dawes Act) Abrogated unilaterally reserved land provisions in treaties Other provisions of the treaties continue to remain in force Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) political question doctrine for U.S. Congress actions Social experiment stated as policy underpinning Kill the Indian, save the man. Government and religious mandatory Boarding Schools for Native children, forced to speak English

General Allotment Act of 1887 Dividing up tribal lands into 160 acre or less allotments for each Indian head of household Remaining lands declared surplus by U.S., which then set the price to pay the Tribe for these lands and sold the lands to settlers Settlers gained lands side by side with tribal members, creating checkerboard pattern Destroyed tribal economies Start of generational impoverishment

Trust relationship and BIA As part of allotment, tribal lands are held in trust: the deed is held by the U.S. for the benefit of the allottee or Tribe, tribal members described as incompetent Trust deeds are managed by the BIA, the BIA has a responsibility to account for use of the land BIA leases land to non-indian rancher and collects rents, puts rents in account (Individual Indian Money or IIM) Almost all tribal government lands are held in trust Trust status for resources on land not to be depleted by BIA or contractors/lessors with accounting to Tribes U.S. trust responsibility often conflicts with U.S. interest

Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 Halted the policy of allotment Provided structure for reorganized tribal government into a corporate structure Provided for Tribes to create federally chartered corporations Had to vote NOT to accept BIA handed out boilerplate constitutions did not accurately reflect the U.S. model, created central body with ultimate authority, great change from former model of gov t

Termination of Federal Recognition of Tribes: 1950- late 1960s House Resolution No. 108 (1953) to make Indians subject to the same laws as all other citizens and to terminate the federal trust relationship Passage of Public Law 280 delegating federal criminal authority to states listed in the act (6 mandatory states: AK,CA, MN, NE, OR and WI) Idaho and Washington optional states Indian Civil Rights Act 1968 amendment requiring tribal consent for PL 280 delegation.

Termination of Federal Recognition by the U.S. End the federal recognition of a Tribe and all tribal citizens no American Indian legal status Sell off or divide all tribal assets 1950s-60s approx. 110 Tribal Nations were terminated by Congress Policy finally abandoned due to overwhelming protest of tribal leaders, rise of national tribal orgs Minimal restoration has occurred Klamath Tribe of Oregon and Menominee Tribe in Wisconsin restored

Indian Self-Determination: present policy Indian Self Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 Government-to-government relationship Tribal governments taking over implementation of BIA services in tribal communities (known as 638 contracts) Self-governance assuming full responsibility for federally funded programs Tribally chartered head start centers, elementary through high school, and 32 Tribal Colleges Re-establishment of tribal economies

Tribes and State Governments Many opportunities for joint projects, for increasing the economic prosperity of all residents Working relationships are the most beneficial for all involved; protracted litigation is costly and rarely ends in full resolution of dispute Working agreements guided by best business and relation standards provide stability and success Identifying common goals of governments and working in cooperation enables greater returns to all in the region

Development of International Indigenous Principles: Full Circle United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (Sept. 13, 2007) Free, prior and informed consent Land ownership for Indigenous peoples and protection of homelands Cultural and Economic Self-Determination Recognition of protection for sacred sites and preservation of spiritual practices Bringing the Declaration to life!