 Amending Indian Appropriation Act of 1892 |
|
This excerpted report from the Committee of Public Lands asserted that dispossessed treaty lands and former military reservations should be closer in price per acre to lands distributed under the Homestead Act.
|
| An Act For the removal of restrictions from part of the lands of allottees of the Five Civilized Tribes, and for other purposes |
|
This congressional act established Oklahoma county probate courts as the main arbiters of land held by allottees of the Five Tribes. In particular, minors, incompetents, and deceased members of the Five Tribes were targeted for guardian interventions in the probate courts.
|
| An Act to Adopt the Negroes of the Chickasaw Nation |
|
This tribal law, which was adopted by the Chickasaw Nation on January 10, 1873, called for the adoption of Chickasaw Freedmen as citizens of the Chickasaw Nation. The law included three primary stipulations for the adoption of Chickasaw Freedmen as tribal citizens: first, that Chickasaw Freedmen be excluded from any financial interests in the $300,000 the tribe would receive and any other tribal invested funds or claims; second, that despite these exclusions from monetary benefits, Chickasaw Freedmen be considered fully subject to the "jurisdiction and laws" of the Chickasaw Nation; and third, that the law would go into effect after being approved "by the proper authority of the United States." The law would not be approved by the U.S. Congress until 1894.
|
| An Act to Authorize the Sale of Certain Lands to the State of Oklahoma |
|
This law authorized the state of Oklahoma to buy land once under the control of tribal nations, as the U.S. government resolved to terminate the special trustee relationship tribes held with the United States, further eroding tribal sovereignty.
|
| An Act To provide for the appointment of additional judges of the United States court in the Indian Territory, and for other purposes |
|
This excerpted congressional act reorganized the federal court system in Indian Territory. The establishment of United States courts worked to undermine tribal judicial systems by asserting broad federal authority over regional criminal and civil disputes.
|
| An Act to Terminate Certain Federal Restrictions upon Indians |
|
This act ended federal support for programs on Native reservations, as the U.S. government resolved to terminate the special trustee relationship tribes held with the United States, further eroding tribal sovereignty.
|
| Articles of Peace and Amity |
|
This treaty, signed between the English colony of Maryland and twelve Eastern Woodland Native American nations, stipulated the rights of Native peoples and their lands and established regulations for interactions between Native Americans and English colonists. The document reflects an already established relationship between the colonists and Native nations by 1666.
|
| Brief of Amici Curiae American Historical Association and Organization of American Historians In Support of Federal and Tribal Parties |
|
The amicus brief for Haaland v. Brackeen, submitted by the American Historical Association and the Organization of American Historians in support of federal and tribal parties, outlines key historical issues of child removal in tribal communities.
|
| Burke Act |
|
The Burke Act amended Section 6 of the Dawes Act to explicitly add competency as a legal marker for allottees, tying settler-colonial judgements of social and cultural behavior to land holding.
|
| Cherokee Allotment Act |
|
Excerpts from this congressional act brought the Cherokee Nation into the federal process of allotment and gave the Dawes Commission exclusive jurisdiction over legal conflicts related to allotment.
|
| Constitution And By-Laws of the Sac and Fox Tribe of Missouri |
|
As part of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, Native American tribes were encouraged to create tribal governments that mirrored the United States government. Many of the tribes' constitutions were essentially the same.
|
| Creek Allotment Act |
|
This excerpted congressional act brought the Muscogee (Creek) Nation into the federal process of allotment.
|
| Creek Supplemental Agreement |
|
Excerpts from this supplement to the Creek Agreement of 1901 renegotiated many legal issues related to allotment, including citizenship, leases, and inheritance. In particular, section six voided Creek law over land, descent, and distribution, and replaced it with Mansfield's Digest of the Statutes of Arkansas.
|
| Curtis Act |
|
These excerpts from the Curtis Act show federal land dispossession in Indian Territory through settler colonial judicial and administrative practices. The act dissolved regional tribal courts, voided tribal laws, and reorganized jurisdiction in Indian Territory.
|
| Dawes Act |
|
This classic document in Native American legal history formalized the process of federal land dispossession. Section 6 made claims to the adoption of civilized life as a necessary precursor to Indigenous participation in allotment.
|
| Dollar General Corp. v. Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians |
|
After an anonymous boy was sexually assaulted by the manager of the Dollar General on Choctaw land, the boy sued the manager and Dollar General in Tribal Court, using the precedent set in Montana v. United States that tribal courts could regulate the activity of non-tribal members who enter into a consensual relationship with the tribe. The Supreme Court was equally divided, so the ruling of the Court of Appeals was held: the tribal court could exercise jurisdiction over Dollar General.
|
| Duro v. Reina |
|
This Supreme Court case looked at Native American tribal jurisdictions. The Court ruled that Native tribes did not have criminal jurisdiction over nonmembers.
|
| Duro-Fix |
|
This amendment to the Indian Civil Rights Act was designed to overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Duro v. Reina. It reinstated the power of Native American tribes to exercise criminal misdemeanor jurisdiction over all Indians.
|
| Ex Parte Crow Dog |
|
Ex Parte Crow Dog was a Supreme Court case that asserted the federal government's role in criminal jurisdiction on tribal lands. The Court held that the federal government did not have jurisdiction over crimes committed by Native peoples against one another on tribal land. The Court's decision in this case affirmed tribal sovereignty, leading to the passage of the Indian Major Crimes Act two years later, which brought certain crimes committed on tribal lands under the jurisdiction of the federal government.
|
| Haaland v. Brackeen |
|
In Haaland v. Brackeen, the Supreme Court upheld the Indian Child Welfare Act, ruling that states could not circumvent ICWA adoption protocol.
|
| Indian Appropriation Bill |
|
This excerpted senate appropriation bill outlined amended laws related to the Dawes Commission and the Five Tribes, which set timelines for critical tribal citizenship processes.
|
| Indian Appropriations Act of 1893 |
|
Excerpts from the 1893 appropriations act show funding for a range of federal projects on tribal lands in the late nineteenth century. Monies were allocated toward payroll for agents, interpreters, surveyors, and boarding school superintendents, as well as traveling and various expenses for same; treaty stipulations and material support on reservations and treaty lands; boarding schools; and distribution on interest of trust fund stocks. The act shows key federal interventions in the establishment of institutions, as well as the commission later entitled the Dawes Commission.
|
| Indian Appropriations Act of 1902 |
|
Referred to as the "Dead Indian Act," excerpts from this congressional act show how privilege was given to guardians with the power to sell allotted land of minor heirs of deceased tribal citizens. The act also established a new federal judicial district in Indian Territory.
|
| Indian Appropriations Act of 1904 |
|
Excerpts from this congressional act show the allocation of funds for a wide variety of expenditures on Native lands including boarding schools, asylums, payroll, transportation, warehouses, police, judges, and medical supplies, and called for the liquidation of tribal land not already allotted to tribal citizens. It also removed alienation restrictions for some allottees on a case-by-case basis.
|
| Indian Child Welfare Act |
|
An Act intended "to protect the best interests of Indian Children," the Indian Child Welfare Act supports tribal sovereignty and tribal involvement in the welfare of its children. The Indian Child Welfare Act was upheld in the 2023 Supreme Court decision in Haaland v. Brackeen.
|