"I am writing about a Supreme Court ruling which is just one more case of the United States courts hurting Native Americans.

At the heart of the case is the federal government’s authority to hold land in trust for Native American tribes

The dispute started in 1991 when the Narragansettes purchased land for economic development and wanted to build an elderly housing complex. State officials feared the tribe would make them lose some tax money and might build a casino. The state said the tribe could not remove land from state control using the Indian Reorganization Act because the tribe was not recognized by the U.S. government until after the 1934 act.

After a court battle, the Supreme Court came back with a ruling that supported the state’s side. This ruling limits the federal government’s authority to hold land in trust for Indian tribes. It’s clear that Congress in 1934 passed the law to set a new standard for future dealings with all tribes, regardless of when they were recognized."

Get the Story:
Chris Campbell: Another case of the U.S. hurting Native Americans (The Ottumwa Courier 3/24)

Supreme Court Decision:
Syllabus | Opinion [Thomas] | Concurrence [Breyer] | Dissent [Stevens] | Concurrence/Dissent [Souter]

Supreme Court Documents:
Oral Argument Transcript | Briefs

Related Stories:
Tribes protest against land-into-trust decision (3/23)
Ione Band worried about casino after high court ruling (3/23)
Tribes to protest against land-into-trust decision (3/20)
Shakopee Tribe not worried about land-into-trust (3/19)
Poarch Band not worried about land-into-trust ruling (3/17)
Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe sticks with casino (3/17)
Narragansett Tribe plans land-into-trust protest (3/16)
Senate hearing on land-into-trust set for April 2 (3/13)
Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe asks Congress for fix (3/12)
Dorgan says no quick fix to land-into-trust ruling (3/9)
California a battleground after land-into-trust ruling (3/6)
Chemehuevi Tribe waits on off-reservation casino (3/6)
NCAI opens winter session in Washington DC (3/4)
Turtle Talk: No easy fix for land-into-trust ruling (3/2)
Rhode Island delegation cool to land-into-trust ruling (3/2)
Fletcher: Now's the time to fix land-into-trust ruling (2/26)
Rep. Rahall to call hearing on land-into-trust ruling (2/26)
Narragansett Tribe to fight land-into-trust ruling (2/26)
Cowlitz Tribe weighs impact of land-into-trust decision (2/26)
Menominee Nation hopes for shift on land-into-trust (2/26)
Gun Lake casino foes review land-into-trust options (2/26)
Supreme Court rules in big land-into-trust case (2/25)
Tribes will ask Congress to 'fix' land-into-trust decision (2/25)
Massachusetts tribe blasts land-into-trust ruling (2/25)
Oneida Nation not worried about land-into-trust (2/25)
Turtle Talk: Implications of land-into-trust ruling (2/25)
Turtle Talk: Thoughts on land-into-trust decision (2/25)
Turtle Talk: Decision brewing in land-into-trust case (01/22)
Land-into-trust case rejected by Supreme Court (1/22)
Land-into-trust case awaits Supreme Court action (1/13)
Turtle Talk: More thoughts on land-into-trust cases (01/13)
Supreme Court rejects two Indian law cases (1/12)
DOJ brief argues 1934 land-into-trust issue again (12/16)
Supreme Court takes on first Indian law case of term (11/04)
Turtle Talk: Poor outlook on land-into-trust case (11/4)
Rhode Island optimistic on land-into-trust case (11/04)
Oregon tribes await outcome of land-into-trust case (11/04)
Appeals court delays casino for Michigan tribe (8/18)
Appeals court judge strikes blows against Indian rights (5/5)
Appeals court backs Gun Lake land-into-trust (4/29)
Appeals court backs Michigan land-into-trust acquisition (7/5)
Appeals court sides with tribe in trust land dispute (1/9)