Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/22pdf/21-1484_aplc.pdf
Page Number: 12

Cite as:  599 U. S. ____ (2023) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

expanded  beyond  their  clear  terms.”    Choctaw  Nation  v. 
United States, 318 U. S. 423, 432 (1943); cf. Jicarilla, 564 
U. S.,  at  173–174,  177–178;  Navajo  Nation,  537  U. S.,  at 
506–507; Mitchell, 445 U. S., at 542, 546.  So it is here. 

Moreover,  it  would  be  anomalous  to  conclude  that  the 
United States must take affirmative steps to secure water
given  that  the  United  States  has  no  similar  duty  with 
respect to the land on the reservation.  For example, under 
the treaty, the United States has no duty to farm the land,
mine  the  minerals,  or  harvest  the  timber  on  the 
reservation—or, for that matter, to build roads and bridges
on the reservation.  Cf. id., at 542–543.  Just as there is no 
such duty with respect to the land, there likewise is no such
duty with respect to the water. 

To be sure, this Court’s precedents have stated that the
United States maintains a general trust relationship with
Indian tribes, including the Navajos.  Jicarilla, 564 U. S., 
at 176.  But as the Solicitor General explains, the United 
States is a sovereign, not a private trustee, meaning that
“Congress may style its relations with the Indians a trust
without  assuming  all  the  fiduciary  duties  of  a  private 
trustee, creating a trust relationship that is limited or bare
compared to a trust relationship between private parties at
common  law.” 
Id.,  at  174  (internal  quotation  marks 
omitted).  Therefore,  unless  Congress  has  created  a 
conventional  trust  relationship  with  a  tribe  as  to  a 
particular trust asset, this Court will not “apply common-
law trust principles” to infer duties not found in the text of
a treaty, statute, or regulation.  Id., at 178.  Here, nothing
in  the  1868  treaty  establishes  a  conventional  trust
relationship with respect to water.

In  short,  the  1868  treaty  did  not  impose  a  duty  on  the
United States to take affirmative steps to secure water for
the  Tribe—including  the  steps  requested  by  the  Navajos
here,  such  as  determining  the  water  needs  of  the  Tribe,
providing an accounting, or developing a plan to secure the