Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf
Page Number: 70.0

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

25 

ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting 

assimilation of the peoples and institutions of this Territory 
to  our  prevailing  American  standard.”  H. R.  Doc.  No.  5, 
58th  Cong.,  2d  Sess.,  pt.  2,  p.  5  (1903).    Accordingly,  the
Commission’s  aim—“in  all  [its]  endeavors”—was  a  “uni-
formity of political institutions to lay the foundation for an
ultimate  common  government.”  H. R.  Doc.  No.  5,  56th 
Cong., 2d Sess., 163 (1900). 

The Creek shared the same understanding.  In 1893, the 
year  Congress  formed  the  Dawes  Commission,  the  Creek 
delegation to Washington recognized that Congress’s “un-
wavering aim” was to “ ‘wipe out the line of political distinc-
tion between an Indian citizen and other citizens of the Re-
public’ ” so that the Tribe could be “ ‘absorbed and become a 
part  of  the  United  States.’ ”    P.  Porter  &  A.  McKellop,
Printed Statement of Creek Delegates, reprinted in Creek 
Delegation Documents 8–9 (Feb. 9, 1893) (quoting Senate
Committee Report); see also S. Doc. No. 111, 54th Cong., 2d 
Sess.,  5,  8  (1897)  (resolution  of  the  Creek  Nation  “recog-
niz[ing]” that Congress proposed to “disintegrat[e] the land
of  our  people”  and  “transform[ ]”  “our  domestic  dependent 
states” “into a State of the Union”).

Particularly  probative  is  the  understanding  of  Pleasant 
Porter,  the  principal  Chief  of  the  Creek  Nation.    He  de-
scribed Congress’s decisions to the Creek people and legis-
lature in messages published in territorial newspapers dur-
ing the run-up to statehood.  Following the extinguishment 
of the Nation’s title, dissolution of tribal courts, and curtail-
ment of lawmaking authority, he told his people that “[i]t 
would be difficult, if not impossible to successfully operate 
the Creek government now.”  App. to Brief for Respondent
8a (Message to Creek National Council (May 7, 1901), re-
printed in The Indian Journal (May 10, 1901)).  The “rem-
nant of a government” had been reduced to a land office for 
finalizing  the  distribution  of  allotments  and  would  be
“maintained only until” the Tribe’s “landed and other inter-
ests . . . have been settled.”  App. to Brief for Respondent