Indigenous History and Rights & Tribal Sovereignty

After 170 years of armed attacks, forced relocations, ethnic cleansing, and genocide of Native Americans, the U.S. military wants to celebrate.

The word "squaw" was declared derogatory by the Department of Interior in 2021. Since then, hundreds of geographic features have been renamed with input from local tribes and Indigenous communities.

Our Mission: The Native American Rights Fund holds governments accountable. We fight to protect Native American rights, resources, and lifeways through litigation, legal advocacy, and legal expertise.

The American Indian College Fund provides scholarships and support for Native American students and tribal colleges and universities, and also supports programs for institutional growth and sustainability and cultural preservation.

First Nations Development Institute improves economic conditions for Native Americans through direct financial grants, technical assistance & training, and advocacy & policy.

"A powerful work of reportage and American history in the vein of Caste and How the Word Is Passed that braids the story of the forced removal of Native Americans onto treaty lands in the nation's earliest days, and a small-town murder in the '90s that led to a Supreme Court ruling reaffirming Native rights to that land over a century later"--;"A powerful work of reportage and American history that braids the story of the forced removal of Native Americans onto treaty lands in the nation's earliest days, and a small-town murder in the 1990s that led to a Supreme Court ruling reaffirming Native rights to that land more than a century later. Before 2020, American Indian reservations made up roughly 55 million acres of land in the United States. Nearly 200 million acres are reserved for National Forests--in the emergence of this great nation, our government set aside more land for trees than for Indigenous peoples. In the 1830s Muscogee people were rounded up by the US military at gunpoint and forced into exile halfway across the continent. At the time, they were promised this new land would be theirs for as long as the grass grew and the waters ran. But that promise was not kept. When Oklahoma was created on top of Muscogee land, the new state claimed their reservation no longer existed. Over a century later, a Muscogee citizen was sentenced to death for murdering another Muscogee citizen on tribal land. His defense attorneys argued the murder occurred on the reservation of his tribe, and therefore Oklahoma didn't have the jurisdiction to execute him. Oklahoma asserted that the reservation no longer existed. In the summer of 2020, the Supreme Court settled the dispute. Its ruling that would ultimately underpin multiple reservations covering almost half the land in Oklahoma, including Nagle's own Cherokee Nation. Here Rebecca Nagle recounts the generations-long fight for tribal land and sovereignty in eastern Oklahoma. By chronicling both the contemporary legal battle and historic acts of Indigenous resistance, By the Fire We Carry stands as a landmark work of American history. The story it tells exposes both the wrongs that our nation has committed and the Native-led battle for justice that has shaped our country." --

The president of the Navajo Nation, one of the largest Native American tribes in the U.S., has removed responsibilities from his vice president.

It's a product of climate change, which is causing wetter conditions across the upper Midwest, and manmade change to the river, altering its flow.

Many Native Americans are coming together for Indigenous Peoples Day to celebrate and acknowledge the ongoing challenges they face with a focus on the election.

A complicated legal fight between the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and the Poarch Creek Indians could have ripple effects throughout Indian country

Eight years after Standing Rock, water protectors are using novel anti-SLAPP laws to help expose the secrets oil companies want to hide.

The largest dam removal project in U.S. history has been completed near the California-Oregon border.

This is a description of the Federal Indian Boarding school program, the origins of Orange Shirt Day, and the relationship of the U.S. Federal Indian Boarding school program to Canada's residential school program.

Support our work: https://democracynow.org/donate/sm-desc-ytWe're joined by award-winning Cherokee writer and journalist Rebecca Nagle, whose new book, By th...

The University of Arizona (“University”) values its relationship with sovereign Indian Tribes and is committed to honoring the fundamental principles of tribal consultation (“Consultation”) and respect required by the Arizona Board of Regents Tribal Consultation Policy (ABOR 1-118). The purpose of the Tribal Consultation Policy is to provide a framework for the University to preserve a foundation of respect and to acknowledge the cultures, traditions, beliefs, governance processes, laws, codes, regulations, and protocols of sovereign Indian Tribes, while maintaining compliance with federal, state, and local laws.

The remote Duck Valley reservation that straddles Nevada and Idaho has battled toxic contaminants on its land for decades.

For nearly 50 years, the remains of two Native American individuals have been stored at the Arizona Capitol. Now, they are on their way back to their final resting place, but one state senator says that isn’t enough. In 1976, two fragments of bones were donated to the Arizona State Library. The remains were transferred to the newly opened Arizona Capitol Museum in 1982, where they remained until 2024. “Unfortunately we just know very little,” said Stephanie Mahan, a senior administrator at the Capitol Museum, of the remains and the individuals they belonged to. The remains are subject to a federal policy called the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, which was passed in 1990. NAGPRA requires all museums and universities receiving federal funding to return Native American remains and artifacts in their collections to the tribes they are most closely affiliated with. Many of the remains held by institutions across the country were taken by archaeologists working at burial sites of Indigenous peoples in the late 1800s and early 1900s. The federal law was enacted to outline a process by which tribes could recover those remains and return their ancestors to their homelands. Some of Arizona’s representatives in Congress at the time, like late-Rep. Morris Udall and late-Sen. John McCain, advocated for the law’s passage. In an effort to comply with the law, Capitol Museum officials reached out to the Arizona State Museum at the University of Arizona and transported the remains to Tucson earlier this year. The museum currently holds the largest collection of Native American remains in Arizona and is working to repatriate them back to the tribes they came from, in addition to assisting other institutions with their repatriations. Neither the Capitol Museum nor Arizona State Museum were able to determine a definitive cultural identity for the individuals in the Capitol Museum, but the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community and the Gila River Indian Community have made a joint claim to the remains. Now that a claim has been made, Arizona State Museum can work with the tribes to return the individuals for reburial. It’s unclear where the remains held at the Capitol originated from or how they arrived in Phoenix, but an official from the State Museum said it's likely that the remains belonged to individuals who were part of one of the many Indigenous communities in the Phoenix area. “Because we can say … that there is a bit of a probability that the remains came from this general region, then it was decided that the tribes within the Phoenix basin area would claim those remains and provide them with a place to rest again,” said Cristin Lucas, the repatriation coordinator at the State Museum. “It may not be this specific group of individuals who are the specific descendants, but the ultimate concern is that everyone should be provided a place of rest in the end.” A spokesperson for the Secretary of State’s Office, which oversees the State Library, said there are no records at the library related to the individuals or their time before they were transferred to the Capitol Museum. Mahan said that the remains were stored at the Polly Rosenbaum State Archives and History Building – which is managed by the Secretary of State’s Office – not the Capitol Museum, which is located in the old Capitol building that once housed the state House and Senate. Despite the Secretary of State Office’s control over the archives building, the Capitol Museum retained legal control over the remains. Now, Arizona State Museum is working to transfer legal control over to the two tribal communities that will receive the individuals for burial. According to Lucas, the remains will likely be repatriated to the tribes in the next few weeks. “Cases like this are really important because they are individuals who basically no information is known [about], and so it's a complex situation both for institutions but also for tribes,” Lucas said. A representative for the Gila River Indian Community declined to comment for this story, citing the sensitive nature of repatriations. A representative for the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community did not respond to requests for comment. State Sen. Theresa Hatathlie, D-Tuba City, is a member of the Navajo Nation and said she was not aware that Native American human remains had been stored at the state Capitol, but said it is “an absolute shame.” “Tribal members are very respectful of how they handle their loved ones' remains,” Hatathlie said. “It's a time of observance and reverence, and so each culture has a certain process in place, but for it to be held like this, it's denying that individual's spiritual process.” Although the federal act governs the repatriation of Native American remains at the federal level, Hatathlie said she thinks more needs to be done at the state level. Museums and institutions in the state can receive federal funding for repatriation efforts, but the state government does not offer any support for institutions – even those like Arizona State Museum that are considered state entities. According to state statute, the musdeum is Arizona’s official archaeological repository and is responsible for all human remains and artifacts that are unearthed on state or private land. Arizona State Museum is allowed by state law to charge for the handling and storage of those remains and artifacts, but it does not receive any specific funding from the state to carry out those duties. “Going forward, specifically for the state of Arizona, to put together a policy tied with consequences, I think that that's a process that needs to take place,” Hatathlie said of institutions that are noncompliant. She said the return of the two individuals who have been held at the Capitol Museum is a start, but she doesn’t want “people [to] think they can walk away with a clear conscience.” “It's an absolute shame that we are even having this conversation in this day and age,” Hatathlie said. “It goes right back down to the blatant disrespect to the Indigenous tribes of the state of Arizona and all over the U.S.”

"Treaties made in the 1800s between the United States and the Indigenous nations of what is now Wisconsin have had profound influence on the region's cultural and political landscape. Yet few people realize that in the early part of that century, the Menominee and Ho-Chunk Nations of Wisconsin signed land treaties with several Indigenous nations from New York State. At the onset of the removal era, these eastern nations, including the Oneida Nation and the Six Nations Confederacy, were under constant pressure from the federal government and land speculators to move to lands around Green Bay and Lake Winnebago. In this groundbreaking book, Carol A. Cornelius has compiled a careful account of these nation-to-nation treaties, in large part in the words of those Indigenous leaders who served as the voices and representatives of their nations. Drawing on a rich collection of primary sources, Cornelius walks readers through how, why, and for whom these treaties were made and how the federal government's failure and unwillingness to acknowledge their legitimacy led to the further loss of Indigenous lands. The living documents transcribed here testify to the complexity and sovereignty of Indigenous governance then and now, making this volume a vital resource for historians and an accessible introduction to Indigenous treatymaking in Wisconsin"--

The politics of domination with which the United States oppresses and exploits the Native Nations, is a violation of the intentions of the framers of the Constitution, and the meaning of the text itself. The arguments of the advocates of the genocide of the 1830s and their appeasers have come to determine the law, policy, and conduct of the United States, while the arguments of the opponents of what came to be known as the Trail of Tears have largely been forgotten, at least among non-Native people. By recovering these arguments, and allowing readers to explore large questions of law, justice, genocide, and politics in a context closely tethered to empirical evidence and careful argument, this book should facilitate more widespread understanding of the Native Nations' rights to their treaty-guaranteed dominion over their own lands and perhaps help open communication between the American people and the peoples of the Native Nations; communication on which the emergence of what Martin Luther King, Jr. called 'the beloved community' depends. Arguments over Genocide aims to reach a broad audience of college students, in courses on American History, Indigenous Studies, and the United States and the World, as well as in more specialized upper division courses on constitutional law, American/European imperialism, and resistance, independence, and decolonization movements. Individuals interested in the founding of the United States, in the Trail of Tears, and in 19th century American history should find the work compelling, as should legal practitioners in the field

Wisconsin is home to 12 tribal nations, each with its own unique history, culture, and government. As sovereign entities, these nations have the inherent right to create, enforce, and adjudicate laws to protect and enhance …

This Note attempts to determine how tribal governments such as the Navajo Nation can exercise greater control over and protect their Nation’s data from external entities. Tribal Nations or Indigenous Nations can exercise their political and cultural sovereignty by utilizing both Indigenous Data Sovereignty (IDSov) and Indigenous Data Governance (IDGov). This Note will examine the Māori’s application of IDSov within their own culturally-specific IDGov framework. Then, there will be an overview of the existing mechanisms available within the Navajo Nation legal system that govern data and the fundamental principles embedded in the culture of the Diné (Navajo) people. Finally, this Note will discuss recommendations that the Navajo Nation can incorporate into its legal system using the Māori’s example of its own data governance model and tools as a template. Overall, the goal of this Note is to demonstrate the legal mechanisms available to the Navajo Nation to implement its own set of data sovereignty principles aligning with its own traditional values, similar to the Māori in Aotearoa (New Zealand).

Self-Determination as Voice addresses the relationship between Indigenous peoples' participation in international governance and the law of self-determination. Many states and international organizations have put in place institutional mechanisms for the express purpose of including Indigenous representatives in international policy-making and decision-making processes, as well as in the negotiation and drafting of international legal instruments. Indigenous peoples' rights have a higher profile in the UN system than ever before. This book argues that the establishment and use of mechanisms and policies to enable a certain level of Indigenous peoples' participation in international governance has become a widespread practice, and perhaps even one that is accepted as law. In theory, the law of self-determination supports this move, and it is arguably emerging as a rule of customary international law. However, ultimately the achievement of the ideal of full and effective participation, in a manner that would fulfil Indigenous peoples' right to self-determination, remains deferred.

"Illuminating the First Nations struggles against the Canadian state, It's All about the Land exposes how racism underpins and shapes Indigenous-settler relationships. Renowned Kahnaw:ke Mohawk activist and scholar Taiaiake Alfred explains how the Canadian government's reconciliation agenda is a new form of colonization that is also guaranteed to fail. Bringing together Alfred's speeches and interviews from over the past two decades, the book shows that Indigenous peoples across the world face a stark choice: reconnect with their authentic cultures and values or continue following a slow road to annihilation. Alfred proposes a radical vision for contesting and confronting the ongoing genocide of the original peoples of this land: Indigenous Resurgence. This way of thinking, being, and practising represents an authentic politics that roots resistance in the spirit, knowledge, and laws of the ancestors. Set against the historic arc of Indigenous-settler relations in Canada and drawing on the rich heritage of First Nations resistance movements, It's All about the Land traces the evolution of Indigenous struggle and liberation through the dynamic processes of oratory, dialogue, action, and reflection."--

In this guide, we'll unpack the legacies of allotment and ways everyone can help Indigenous people and nations fight back.

A webinar hosted by The Conversation brings together experts in law, health, policy and Indigenous affairs to explain some of the most pressing problems related to water in the US.