Nation’s goals, saying ‘‘the current status 
of a long-term pattern of factional conflict 
may either have the undesirable con-
sequence 
of 
negatively 
determining 
Schaghticoke’s tribal status. . .’’. 
(5) Congress acknowledges that two noted Na-
tive American anthropologists retained to advocate 
for the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation concluded after 
exhaustive, years-long research that the group did 
not and could not establish continuous community 
and political authority as required by the acknowl-
edgment regulations, more particularly: 
(A) Dr. William Starna, a professor of an-
thropology and expert in tribal acknowledgment 
at the State University of New York at 
Oneonta, who has worked on behalf of tribal pe-
titioners Gay Head Wampanoag, Golden Hill 
Paugussett, and Eastern Pequot in addition to 
the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, concluded in 
two separate reports, in 1989 and again in 
1993, that the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation 
could not satisfy either the continuous commu-
nity or political authority and influence criteria. 
(B) Dr. Ann McMullen, a professor of an-
thropology and expert in tribal acknowledgment
at Brown University, who has worked on behalf 
of tribal petitioners Mashpee and Paucatuck 
Eastern Pequot, conducted further research at 
the request of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation. 
In a 1999, report Dr. McMullen affirmed Dr. 
Starna’s s conclusions, saying that ‘‘too much 
still rests on Schaghticoke as a piece of Indian 
land occasionally occupied by Indians and not 
the focal point for a larger dispersed tribe’’. 
(6) Paragraph (4) demonstrates that the 
Schaghticoke Tribal Nation does not satisfy each of 
the seven mandatory criteria for acknowledgment 
under section 83.7 of title 25, Code of Federal Reg-
ulations. If further demonstrates willful manipula-
tion of both the acknowledgment regulations and ex-
isting agency precedent by the Bureau of Indian Af-
fairs. 
(7) For the reasons described in paragraphs (4) 
and (6), the Final Determination acknowledging the 
Schaghticoke Tribal Nation as an Indian tribe with-
in the meaning of Federal law is erroneous and un-
lawful. 
(8) Congress cannot allow the erroneous and 
unlawful decision of the Bureau of Indian Affairs to 
acknowledge the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation as an
Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law to 
stand because of the significant, harmful, and irre-
versible effects it would have on neighboring commu-
nities, more particularly: 
(A) A sovereign, federally acknowledged 
Indian tribe is exempted from a broad range of 
State laws and regulations, including State and 
local taxation. 
(B) A sovereign, federally acknowledged 
Indian tribe is granted rights under Federal law 
to engage in casino-style gaming under the In-
dian Gaming Regulatory Act, and the construc-
tion and operation of a Las Vegas-style casino 
in Western Connecticut would place unbearable 
burdens on municipalities, on local tax bases 
and taxpayers, and on an aging transportation 
infrastructure that could not tolerate the vol-
ume of traffic such a facility would create. 
(C) A sovereign, federally acknowledged 
Indian tribe has standing in Federal court to 
pursue land claims litigation on property under 
the Federal laws commonly known as the ‘‘Non-
Intercourse Act’’, claims that threaten land-
owners’ property rights, cloud title in wide-
spread areas, and prevent the sale of real prop-
erty. 
(b) PURPOSES.—The purposes of the Act are as fol-
lows: 
(1) To repeal the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ ac-
knowledgment of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation as 
an Indian tribe within the meaning of Federal law. 
(2) To correct the unlawful and erroneous deci-
sion by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, in violation of 
Federal regulations and contrary to longstanding 
agency precedent, to acknowledge the Schaghticoke 
Tribal Nation as an Indian tribe within the meaning 
of Federal law. 
(3) To protect the taxpayers and municipalities 
of the State of Connecticut from the undue burdens 
and violations of sovereignty described in subsection 
(a)(8). 
(4) To affirm the 7 mandatory acknowledgment 
criteria and prevent a precedent setting decision that 
relaxes them for northeastern groups. 
(c) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this Act, the 
following definitions apply:—
(1) SCHAGHTICOKE TRIBAL NATION.—The term 
‘‘Schaghticoke 
Tribal 
Nation’’ 
means 
the 
Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, a federally recognized
Indian tribe based at 33 Elizabeth Street, 4th Floor, 
Derby, Connecticut, 06148. 
(2) FINAL DETERMINATION.—The term ‘‘Final 
Determination’’ means the decision document con-
taining an administrative decision made pursuant to 
section 83 et seq. of title 25, Code of Federal Regu-
lations by the Office of Federal Acknowledgment, 
Bureau of Indian Affairs, dated January 29, 2004, 
affirmed by Aurene M. Martin, Principal Deputy As-
sistant Secretary-Indian Affairs, published in the 
Federal Register on February 5, 2004 (69 Fed. Reg. 
5570), that acknowledged the Schaghticoke Tribal 
Nation as an Indian tribe within the meaning of 
Federal law. 
(3) REQUEST
FOR
RECONSIDERATION.—The 
term ‘‘Request for Reconsideration’’ means the ad-
ministrative appeal of the Final Determination, initi-
ated by the Attorney General of the State of Con-
necticut on behalf of the State and Interested Par-
ties pursuant to section 83.11 of title 25, Code of 
Federal Regulations, In re Federal Acknowledgment 
of the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation, Docket Nos. 
IBIA 04–83–A, IBIA 04–94–A, IBIA 04–95–A, 
IBIA 04–96–A, and IBIA 04–97–A.