Summary: Native American Sovereignty James R. Clark

1928 Words8 Pages
Clark - 1 Native American Sovereignty James R. Clark For literally thousands of years Indian tribes lived as sovereign nations and enjoyed all of the benefits of a people who controlled their own destinies. According to K. Kickingbird, L. Kickingbird, C. Chibitty and C. Berkey, all from the Institute for the Development of American Indian Law, these sovereign rights include: “1. The power to make and enforce laws, 2. The power to define and regulate the use of its territory, 3. The power to determine membership or citizenship, 4. The power to regulate trade within its borders […] and between its members and those of other nations” (5). Since the arrival of Europeans, many of these sovereign rights of the tribes, rights that…show more content…
Since the arrival of the European settlers, there has been much discussion about the sovereignty of the Native Americans who have lived on this land for thousands of years. For the Indians, the prevailing notion has always been that they are sovereign nations, capable of deciding their destinies, and in fact, the United States government has agreed with them in treaties. In his essay “International Law and Politics,” Glenn Morris notes that a former attorney general of the United States, William Wirt (Attorney General in 1828), once said of Indian Nations: “[…] Like all other independent nations, they have the absolute power of war and peace. Like all other independent nations, their territories are inviolable by any other sovereignty…As a nation, they are still free and independent. They are entirely self-governed, self-directed. They treat [enter into treaties], or refuse to treat, at their pleasure […].” (333) This statement gives us insight into how the government at that time felt about Indian sovereignty. Wirt clearly states that Indian nations are sovereign and they should be “selfgoverned” and “self-directed.” With this idea of sovereignty in mind, the United States entered into many treaties with the Indian Nations. According to Ward Churchill, there were “371 formal treaties [that were] entered into by the U.S. government with the…show more content…
Despite this, the United States has often passed laws which usurp Indian sovereignty. One problem that continues to crop up in these discussions of sovereignty is the question of what exactly sovereignty means. The definition of sovereignty can be hard to pin down. One of the best definitions came from Mike Myers, a Seneca Indian, as quoted in the essay “Indian Sovereignty” by K. Kickingbird, L. Kickingbird, Chibitty and Berkley: “Ideally, sovereignty is the unrestricted right of groups of people to organize themselves in political, social and cultural patterns that meet their needs. It is the right of a people to freely define ways in which to use land, resources and manpower for their common good. Above all, sovereignty is the right of people to exist without external exploitation or interference.” (2) However, many of these rights of sovereignty were discarded by legislation passed by the U.S. Congress. One of the first such acts was the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1790. This act effectively extended federal criminal jurisdiction into Indian territory (Kickingbird et al. 18). This was a clear violation of the principle of self-rule. Other acts had similar effects on Indian sovereignty:  Indian Removal Act of 1830 – Forced Indians in the
Open Document