Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-532_q86b.pdf
Page Number: 12.0

Cite as:  587 U. S. ____ (2019) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

Assn.,  443  U. S.  658,  682  (1979);  Antoine  v.  Washington, 
420  U. S.  194,  207–208  (1975);  Puyallup  Tribe  v.  Depart-
ment  of  Game  of  Wash.,  391  U. S.  392,  398  (1968)). 
“[B]ecause treaty  rights are reconcilable with state sover-
eignty  over  natural  resources,”  the  Mille  Lacs  Court  con-
cluded, there is no reason to find statehood itself sufficient 
“to extinguish Indian treaty rights to hunt, fish, and gather
on land within state boundaries.”  526 U. S., at 205. 

In lieu of adopting the equal-footing analysis, the Court 
instead  drew  on  numerous  decisions  issued  since  Race 
Horse to explain that Congress “must clearly express” any 
intent to abrogate Indian treaty rights.  526 U. S., at 202 
(citing  United  States  v.  Dion,  476  U. S.  734,  738–740 
(1986); Fishing Vessel Assn., 443 U. S., at 690; Menominee 
Tribe  v.  United  States,  391  U. S.  404,  413  (1968)).    The 
Court  found  no  such  “ ‘clear  evidence’ ”  in  the  Act  admit-
ting  Minnesota  to  the  Union,  which  was  “silent”  with 
regard to Indian treaty rights.  526 U. S., at 203. 

The Mille Lacs Court then turned to what it referred to 
as Race Horse’s “alternative holding” that the rights in the 
Shoshone-Bannock  Treaty  “were  not  intended  to  survive 
Wyoming’s  statehood.”    526  U. S.,  at  206.    The  Court 
observed  that  Race  Horse  could  be  read  to  suggest  that 
treaty rights only survive statehood if the rights are “ ‘ “of 
such a nature as to imply their perpetuity,” ’ ” rather than 
“ ‘temporary  and  precarious.’ ”    526  U. S.,  at  206.    The 
Court  rejected  such  an  approach.    The  Court  found  the 
“ ‘temporary  and  precarious’ ”  language  “too  broad  to  be 
useful,”  given  that  almost  any  treaty  rights—which  Con-
gress  may  unilaterally  repudiate,  see  Dion,  476  U. S.,  at 
738—could be described in those terms.  526 U. S., at 206– 
207.  Instead,  Mille  Lacs  framed  Race  Horse  as  inquiring 
into  whether  the  Senate  “intended  the  rights  secured  by
the  . . .  Treaty  to  survive  statehood.”  526  U. S.,  at  207. 
Applying this test, Mille Lacs concluded that statehood did 
not  extinguish  the  Chippewa  bands’  treaty  rights.    The