Ten Largest American Indian Tribes, 2010 Ten Largest American Indian Tribes 2010 Census Data Do you know which American Indian tribes are near you? The Navajo tribe is the most populous, with 308,013 people identifying with the group. The Cherokee tribe is the second most common, with 285,476 Americans identifying with that group. Name America's 2nd Largest Indian Tribe Expels Blacks : NPR America's 2nd Largest Indian Tribe Expels Blacks Embed Embed America's 2nd Largest Indian Tribe Expels Blacks America's 2nd Largest Indian Tribe Expels Blacks Embed Embed Heard on Tell Me More NPR Staff Black Freedmen, who are descended from the slaves of Cherokee Indians, protest their expulsion on Sept. 2 outside a regional Bureau of Indian Affairs office in Muskogee, Okla. Marilyn Vann, in pink, is the president of the Descendants of Freedmen Association. Alex Kellogg/NPR hide caption toggle caption Alex Kellogg/NPR The Cherokee Nation recently stripped citizenship from a majority of African-Americans who descended from slaves of wealthy Cherokee Indians before the Civil War.

Host Michel Martin discusses this controversial move with MacArthur Fellow Tiya Miles, who studies interrelated histories of African-Americans and Native Americans. MICHEL MARTIN, host: I'm Michel Martin and this is TELL ME MORE from NPR News. Coming up, a major civil rights victory for LGBT servicemembers. The policy which prevented them from serving openly in the military, the so-called "don't ask, don't tell" policy comes to an end today. We'll talk with a decorated Air Force veteran who's career came under a cloud because of "don't ask, don't tell." We'll ask him about his thoughts about this day. But first, we wanted to talk about one of the many complicated stories that involve race and heritage. While it is well-known history that slavery was a common practice in the Deep South before the Civil War, less well known is the fact that it wasn't just white families that were slave owners. Some well-to-do Native Americans also owned slaves. In fact, the late Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Wilma Mankiller wrote in her autobiography that, quote, "The truth is that the practice of slavery will forever cast a shadow on the great Cherokee Nation," unquote.

Indeed that shadow continues today in the latest iteration over the debate over just who to include as members of the Cherokee Nation. The Cherokee Supreme Court has stripped some of the slave descendents known as freedmen of their Cherokee citizenship in the decision last month. We wanted to learn more about this story and the interesting intersecting histories of African-Americans and Native Americans, so we've called upon Tiya Miles. She is a professor and chair of the Afro-American and African Studies Department at the University of Michigan. She's also the author of several books on the subject of African-American and Cherokee history, including "The House on Diamond Hill: A Cherokee Plantation Story." And today, it was also announced that Professor Miles is a 2011 MacArthur Fellow. That means she is the recipient of one of those coveted $500,000 Genius Grants. And she's with us now from WUOM in Ann Arbor, Michigan. Professor Miles, congratulations. Welcome to the program. TIYA MILES: Thank you so much, Michel. I'm glad to be here. MARTIN: And I do hope we get a chance to talk a little bit about the MacArthur in a minute.

But I did want to talk about this story that's in the news. It's a very complicated history. Could you just set the stage for us about the moment in which these two cultures - African-Americans and the Cherokee Nation - intersected. MILES: Sure. Well, African-Americans - actually, Africans and Native American people first met each other during the colonial era. So, that would have been in the 1500s when Africans were brought to the Americas as both slaves and as indentured servants. That relationship then took a number of twists and turns over time. And one of the most difficult, the 1800s, the 19th century, when some Native Americans in the South began to own blacks as slaves. MARTIN: So, what is this dispute over who is included and who is not included? And why is this - I mean, this would seem to have been something that would have been settled long ago. MILES: Well, I think that we can look at the situation in Native American nations that had owned slaves as being somewhat similar to the United States situation. The U.S. is a country that owns slaves and all the slaves were freed and received citizenship.

That is an issue that is hardly settled. They are vested as the legacies of racial division, segregation, racial hierarchy that Americans feel as a whole. And it's similar in Native American nations that have legacies of slave holding. Those tensions still remain. MARTIN: Well, as I understand it, the whole question of eligibility is determined using something called the Dawes Rolls. This is something that arose from the Dawes Commission, which was established in 1893, as I understand it, to convince what we're called the five civilized tribes to agree to dissolve the reservation system and that they wanted a list - the U.S. government wanted a list of all the members and the so-called Dawes Rolls are considered, what, determinative of who is a member of the nation and who is not. But so, what role did the Dawes Rolls play in this current dispute over whether the so-called Cherokee Freedman are members or not? MILES: Well, the Dawes Rolls are central to this dispute. So, in 1887 the Dawes Act was passed. And as you said, that led to an enrollment or development of a census of Native American people. Because before land could be allotted, the U.S.

government had to know who to give the lands to. That list was a segregated list. It was a segregated census that divided people based upon their racial ancestry. So, the Dawes Roll was organized by Cherokees by blood and to married wives and also Freedmen. And these lists were incomprehensive to begin with. A number of people who were descended from slaves owned by Cherokees didn't even get to make the list, because they weren't there. They had fled during the Civil War, for example. Other people who had been on previous lists weren't allowed to be on the lists because of the arbitrary way in which designations were made. One example of this, which I think is really telling and also disturbing, is that the Dawes enrollment group that came to make the list would set up tents in the Indian nations. And one tent was called the Indian tent. The other tent was called the darky tent. And there was a second name for the darky tent, which I will not mention on air but I think that you can probably fill in that link. MARTIN: Was it the N word? Did it involve the N word? MILES: Yes, it did. MARTIN: OK.

MILES: And so, when Cherokee people descendants of slaves came to be enrolled, they were directed to one or the other tent. So, the decision was made before they even had access to an interview and got to say who they were. The decision was made whether or not they should be written down on the list as a Cherokee person, quote, "by blood," or as a Freedmen. MARTIN: If you're just joining us, I'm Michel Martin, and this is TELL ME MORE from NPR News. We're speaking with Tiya Miles. She's a professor of history and a 2011 MacArthur Fellow, it's just been announced. We're talking about the Cherokee Freedmen. They're descendants of slaves which were owned by members of the Cherokee Nation. That tribe's Supreme Court has recently revoked the citizenship of the descendants of Freedmen. So, this latest chapter in this historical saga for now some 2,800 Freedmen have been stripped of their Cherokee citizenship, which means that they're no longer eligible to receive, you know, whatever tribal benefits they had been receiving and that their votes won't be counted in an upcoming tribal election.

In response to that, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has frozen some payments to the Cherokee Nation until this matter is resolved. Why is this coming up now? MILES: I think there could be a few reasons, and this is speculation on my part because I'm not in the Cherokee Nation. I'm not a member of that tribe. But I think that history suggests that when resources are at stake, there tends to be greater tension around the relationship between enrolled Cherokee people who define themselves as being Cherokee, quote, "by blood," and the descendants of freed people. MARTIN: You can imagine that this has gotten a lot of attention. It's highly controversial. It's heavily covered, as you might imagine, in the Indian media. And there are those who are saying that this is just racist. I mean, that this is an attempt to define nationhood by blood brings up all kinds of nasty historical analogies. And there are a lot of people who are just shocked by that. Should they be? MILES: Well, I think so. I'm shocked. And I think that it's frustrating. It's ironic.

It's so difficult to confront the fact that this whole tangle around who should be Cherokee was really set in motion by the United States government, which had colonized Cherokee people and other indigenous people in this nation. So, what the Cherokee Nation is doing now is relying on these Dawes Rolls which were forced upon them by the U.S. government. MARTIN: OK, but that was in the 19th century. MILES: Well, I think that... MARTIN: We got a lot of racial practices that occurred in the 19th century and before that people no longer embrace. MILES: Well, I think that those legacies remain with us. And I think that in the case of the Cherokee Nation and other native nations, there's a felt conflict between the sovereignty of those nations and the question of what the role should be, what the place should be of minorities in those nations. So, whereas the United States can and has at times protected the status of minorities and not felt itself threatened by Canada, for instance, about what it does. Native nations definitely feel themselves threatened by the United States government.

They are concerned that their sovereignty, the right to make decisions for themselves, is going to be undermined by the U.S. government as it has been so many times in the past. But what I feel is a real problem here is that the Cherokee Nation is taking its definition from what really has been a white supremacist U.S. nation that fought to - I'm sorry. Go ahead, Michel. MARTIN: Go ahead. I was just going to ask you how you got interested in this. MILES: I got interested in this back in graduate school. And there were a few different experiences that led to my focus on it. One is that I come from an African-American family that has had an oral history of Native American ancestry and my grandmother, when she talked about it, didn't have facts and names. She just had the story that kind of took on the shape of a myth in our family. It so happened that I ended up marrying into a Native American family myself, and then I had a whole other set of experiences around black and Native American relationships.

And then when I went to graduate school and I was taking a course in Native American history and I was quite surprised to discover that, in fact, there had been quite a lot of conflict, tension, pain between Native Americans and African-Americans. So I wanted to explore that. And I really set out to kind of prove my grandmother's story right. And I wanted to find examples of African-American and Native American resistance to racism in colonialism in the United States. MARTIN: But what you found was the opposite? MILES: I did. I did. I found the opposite. I found a story that really had to do with the ways in which the pressures of colonialism and slavery came to bear on native people as well as black people, and sometimes led them to make really awful choices. MARTIN: So before we let you go, we always have to ask. Where were you and what were you doing when you got the call? For people who are unaware of the MacArthur so-called Genius Grants are not things you can apply for. You have to be nominated. People generally don't find out that they've won until they get the call. So, what were you doing when you got the call?

MILES: I was at home cleaning the kitchen when I got the call. And this was something that was so completely out of the blue and so completely overwhelming that I actually had to just sit down. I was on the staircase in our house. I had to sit on the steps just to kind of get my bearings and to let this sink in. MARTIN: Any idea what you'll do with the grant? MILES: Well, I've never actually contemplated so much money, but I do have a couple of ideas. One thing that I'm really excited about is continuing my research and taking it into other areas within the U.S. and Native American history. So, I've worked so far on the South and Indian territory. But now, I want to really look at slavery in the north and in particular in Detroit and in Michigan, because this is a place where we also don't really think about slavery existing, but it did. And the slaves in Detroit and in Michigan and Ontario were African-American and also Native American. MARTIN: Well, I hope you'll get a nice bottle of wine, too, in there, maybe. MILES: Maybe. Maybe I'll do that.

(SOUNDBITE OF LAUGHTER) MARTIN: Tiya Miles is a professor and chair of the Afro-American and African Studies Department at the University of Michigan. And it has just been announced today that she is the winner of a 2011 MacArthur Fellowship, a so-called Genius Grant, and we want to congratulate her for that. Professor Miles, thank you so much for joining us. MILES: Thank you so much, Michel. Copyright © 2011 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at for further information. NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by Verb8tm, Inc. , an NPR contractor, and produced using a proprietary transcription process developed with NPR. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

11 Native American Tribes, Including The Two Largest, Prohibit Gay Marriage 11 Native American Tribes, Including The Two Largest, Prohibit Gay Marriage By Kathleen Brown | June 8, 2015 | 1:44 PM EDT "Navajo Wedding," by Mike Larsen, circa 1980. (National Museum of the American Indian). (CNSNews.com) -- Tribal laws of the two largest Native American tribes in the United States prohibit gay marriage, as do the laws of nine other smaller tribes. The Navajo and Cherokee Nations, the first and second largest tribes respectively, together have about 600,000 members. The nine smaller tribes that ban gay marriage have another 350,000 members. These tribes all either define marriage as between a man and a woman or explicitly prohibit same-sex marriage, according to the Associated Press (AP). Since 2011, six of the eleven tribes revisited and upheld their preexisting legal definitions of marriage as between a man and a woman, AP researchers found.

Due to their status as sovereign nations, these 11 tribes will not need to change their marriage laws, which govern nearly one million tribal members, even if the Supreme Court legalizes gay marriage later this month. If the court’s Obergefell v. Hodges ruling determines that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, Native American bans on gay marriage will remain in effect because federally-recognized tribes have the right to establish their own laws and are not subject to the U.S. Constitution. For example, the Cherokee Nation Marriage and Family Protection Act of 2004 defines marriage as “a civil contract between one man and one woman” and states that “no marriage shall be contracted...between parties of the same gender.” Title 6 of Chickasaw tribal law states that “a marriage between persons of the same gender performed in any jurisdiction shall not be recognized as valid and binding in the Chickasaw Nation.” However, the law notes that it does not prohibit “members of the same sex from entering written contracts” with one another. According to the gay-rights advocacy group Freedom to Marry , at least ten Native American tribes do permit gay marriage.

However, this list does not include any of the ten largest tribes according to 2010 U.S. Census Bureau data . Of the tribes that do recognize same-sex marriage, some have made changes to their marriage laws to include recognition of same-sex couples, while others have adhered to a preexisting policy that tribal marriages be governed by the surrounding state’s marriage laws. Many other tribes remain neutral, AP reports, neither taking steps to officially recognize gay marriage nor changing the wording of their marriage laws to include or preclude recognition of same-sex couples. However, the legal language for some of these neutral tribes makes reference to heterosexual couples by use of such phrases as “husband and wife,” “a man and a woman,” and “unmarried male and...unmarried female.” For example, the Northern Cheyenne Uniform Marriage and Divorce Act defines marriage as “a personal relationship between a man and a woman arising out of a civil contract to which the consent of the parties is essential,” in which spouses “take each other as husband and wife.” To date, such laws have not been applied to same-sex couples.

CNSNews.com contacted The Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest LGBT advocacy group, for a comment, but the group did not respond. Copyright 1998-2017 CNSNews.com. CNSNews.com is a division of the Media Research Center. The mission of the Media Research Center is to create a media culture in America where truth and liberty flourish. The MRC is a research and education organization operating under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and contributions to the MRC are tax-deductible. Copyright © 2014, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved. Federal employees and military personnel can donate to the Media Research Center through the Combined Federal Campaign or CFC. To donate to the MRC, use CFC #12489. Visit the CFC website for more information about giving opportunities in your workplace. What are Indian treaty rights? From 1778 to 1871, the United States’ relations with individual American Indian nations indigenous to what is now the U.S. were defined and conducted largely through the treaty-making process.

These “contracts among nations” recognized and established unique sets of rights, benefits, and conditions for the treaty-making tribes who agreed to cede of millions of acres of their homelands to the United States and accept its protection. Like other treaty obligations of the United States, Indian treaties are considered to be “the supreme law of the land,” and they are the foundation upon which federal Indian law and the federal Indian trust relationship is based. What is the legal status of American Indian and Alaska Native tribes? Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution vests Congress, and by extension the Executive and Judicial branches of our government, with the authority to engage in relations with the tribes, thereby firmly placing tribes within the constitutional fabric of our nation. When the governmental authority of tribes was first challenged in the 1830's, U. S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall articulated the fundamental principle that has guided the evolution of federal Indian law to the present: That tribes possess a nationhood status and retain inherent powers of self-government. What is the federal Indian trust responsibility?

The federal Indian trust responsibility is a legal obligation under which the United States “has charged itself with moral obligations of the highest responsibility and trust” toward Indian tribes (Seminole Nation v. United States, 1942). This obligation was first discussed by Chief Justice John Marshall in Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831). Over the years, the trust doctrine has been at the center of numerous other Supreme Court cases, thus making it one of the most important principles in federal Indian law. The federal Indian trust responsibility is also a legally enforceable fiduciary obligation on the part of the United States to protect tribal treaty rights, lands, assets, and resources, as well as a duty to carry out the mandates of federal law with respect to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages. In several cases discussing the trust responsibility, the Supreme Court has used language suggesting that it entails legal duties, moral obligations, and the fulfillment of understandings and expectations that have arisen over the entire course of the relationship between the United States and the federally recognized tribes. What is a federally recognized tribe?

A federally recognized tribe is an American Indian or Alaska Native tribal entity that is recognized as having a government-to-government relationship with the United States, with the responsibilities, powers, limitations, and obligations attached to that designation, and is eligible for funding and services from the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Furthermore, federally recognized tribes are recognized as possessing certain inherent rights of self-government (i.e., tribal sovereignty) and are entitled to receive certain federal benefits, services, and protections because of their special relationship with the United States. At present, there are 567 federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and villages. How is federal recognition status conferred? Historically, most of today’s federally recognized tribes received federal recognition status through treaties, acts of Congress, presidential executive orders or other federal administrative actions, or federal court decisions. In 1978, the Interior Department issued regulations governing the Federal Acknowledgment Process (FAP) to handle requests for federal recognition from Indian groups whose character and history varied widely in a uniform manner. These regulations – 25 C.F.R. Part 83 – were revised in 1994 and are still in effect.

Also in 1994, Congress enacted Public Law 103-454, the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act (108 Stat. 4791, 4792), which formally established three ways in which an Indian group may become federally recognized: By Act of Congress, By the administrative procedures under 25 C.F.R. Part 83, or By decision of a United States court. However, a tribe whose relationship with the United States has been expressly terminated by Congress may not use the Federal Acknowledgment Process. Only Congress can restore federal recognition to a “terminated” tribe. The Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act also requires the Secretary of the Interior to publish annually a list of the federally recognized tribes in the Federal Register. What does tribal sovereignty mean to American Indians and Alaska Natives? When tribes first encountered Europeans, they were a power to be reckoned with because the combined American Indian and Alaska Native population dominated the North American continent.

Their strength in numbers, the control they exerted over the natural resources within and between their territories, and the European practice of establishing relations with countries other than themselves and the recognition of tribal property rights led to tribes being seen by exploring foreign powers as sovereign nations, who treatied with them accordingly. However, as the foreign powers’ presence expanded and with the establishment and growth of the United States, tribal populations dropped dramatically and tribal sovereignty gradually eroded. While tribal sovereignty is limited today by the United States under treaties, acts of Congress, Executive Orders, federal administrative agreements and court decisions, what remains is nevertheless protected and maintained by the federally recognized tribes against further encroachment by other sovereigns, such as the states. Tribal sovereignty ensures that any decisions about the tribes with regard to their property and citizens are made with their participation and consent. What is a federal Indian reservation? In the United States there are three types of reserved federal lands: military, public, and Indian. A federal Indian reservation is an area of land reserved for a tribe or tribes under treaty or other agreement with the United States, executive order, or federal statute or administrative action as permanent tribal homelands, and where the federal government holds title to the land in trust on behalf of the tribe.

Approximately 56.2 million acres are held in trust by the United States for various Indian tribes and individuals. There are approximately 326 Indian land areas in the U.S. administered as federal Indian reservations (i.e., reservations, pueblos, rancherias, missions, villages, communities, etc.). The largest is the 16 million-acre Navajo Nation Reservation located in Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah. The smallest is a 1.32-acre parcel in California where the Pit River Tribe’s cemetery is located. Many of the smaller reservations are less than 1,000 acres. Some reservations are the remnants of a tribe’s original land base. Others were created by the federal government for the resettling of Indian people forcibly relocated from their homelands. Not every federally recognized tribe has a reservation. Federal Indian reservations are generally exempt from state jurisdiction, including taxation, except when Congress specifically authorizes such jurisdiction. Are there any federal Indian reservations in Alaska? Yes, one. It is the Metlakatla Indian Community of the Annette Island Reserve in southeastern Alaska. Are there other types of “Indian lands”? Yes.

Other types of Indian lands are: Allotted lands, which are remnants of reservations broken up during the federal allotment period of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Although the practice of allotting lands had begun in the eighteenth century, it was put to greater use after the Civil War. By 1885, over 11,000 patents had been issued to individual Indians under various treaties and laws. Starting with the General Allotment Act in 1887 (also known as the Dawes Act) until the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, allotments were conveyed to members of affected tribes and held in trust by the federal government. As allotments were taken out of trust, they became subject to state and local taxation, which resulted in thousands of acres passing out of Indian hands. Today, 10,059,290.74 million acres of individually owned lands are still held in trust for allotees and their heirs.

Restricted status, also known as restricted fee, where title to the land is held by an individual Indian person or a tribe and which can only be alienated or encumbered by the owner with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior because of limitations contained in the conveyance instrument pursuant to federal law. State Indian reservations, which are lands held in trust by a state for an Indian tribe. With state trust lands title is held by the state on behalf of the tribe and the lands are not subject to state property tax. They are subject to state law, however. State trust lands stem from treaties or other agreements between a tribal group and the state government or the colonial government(s) that preceded it. American Indian and Alaska Native tribes, businesses, and individuals may also own land as private property. In such cases, they are subject to state and local laws, regulations, codes, and taxation. Does the United States still make treaties with Indian tribes? No. Congress ended treaty-making with Indian tribes in 1871. Since then, relations with Indian groups have been formalized and/or codified by Congressional acts, Executive Orders, and Executive Agreements.

Between 1778, when the first treaty was made with the Delawares, to 1871, when Congress ended the treaty-making period, the United States Senate ratified 370 treaties. At least 45 others were negotiated with tribes but were never ratified by the Senate. The treaties that were made often contain commitments that have either been fulfilled or subsequently superseded by Congressional legislation. In addition, American Indians and Alaska Natives can access education, health, welfare, and other social service programs available to all citizens, if they are eligible. Even if a tribe does not have a treaty with the United States, or has treaties that were negotiated but not ratified, its members may still receive services from the BIA or other federal programs, if eligible. The specifics of particular treaties signed by government negotiators with Indian tribes are contained in one volume (Vol. II) of the publication, Indian Affairs, Laws and Treaties: 1778-1883, compiled, annotated, and edited by Charles J. Kappler. Published by the United States Government Printing Office in 1904, it is now out of print, but can be found in most large law libraries and on the Internet at .

The treaty volume has also been published privately under the title, “Indian Treaties: 1778-1883.” Originals of all the treaties are maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration of the General Services Administration. For more information on how to obtain copies or for more information about the treaties visit NARA’s website at . II. The Nature of Federal-Tribal and State-Tribal Relations What is the relationship between the tribes and the United States? The relationship between federally recognized tribes and the United States is one between sovereigns, i.e., between a government and a government. This “government-to-government” principle, which is grounded in the United States Constitution, has helped to shape the long history of relations between the federal government and these tribal nations. What is the relationship between the tribes and the individual states? Because the Constitution vested the Legislative Branch with plenary power over Indian Affairs, states have no authority over tribal governments unless expressly authorized by Congress. While federally recognized tribes generally are not subordinate to states, they can have a government-to-government relationship with these other sovereigns, as well. Furthermore, federally recognized tribes possess both the right and the authority to regulate activities on their lands independently from state government control.

They can enact and enforce stricter or more lenient laws and regulations than those of the surrounding or neighboring state(s) wherein they are located. Yet, tribes frequently collaborate and cooperate with states through compacts or other agreements on matters of mutual concern such as environmental protection and law enforcement. What is Public Law 280 and where does it apply? In 1953, Congress enacted Public Law 83-280 (67 Stat. 588) to grant certain states criminal jurisdiction over American Indians on reservations and to allow civil litigation that had come under tribal or federal court jurisdiction to be handled by state courts. However, the law did not grant states regulatory power over tribes or lands held in trust by the United States; federally guaranteed tribal hunting, trapping, and fishing rights; basic tribal governmental functions such as enrollment and domestic relations; nor the power to impose state taxes. These states also may not regulate matters such as environmental control, land use, gambling, and licenses on federal Indian reservations.

The states required by Public Law 280 to assume civil and criminal jurisdiction over federal Indian lands were Alaska (except the Metlakatla Indian Community on the Annette Island Reserve, which maintains criminal jurisdiction), California, Minnesota (except the Red Lake Reservation), Nebraska, Oregon (except the Warm Springs Reservation), and Wisconsin. In addition, the federal government gave up all special criminal jurisdiction in these states over Indian offenders and victims. The states that elected to assume full or partial jurisdiction were Arizona (1967), Florida (1961), Idaho (1963, subject to tribal consent), Iowa (1967), Montana (1963), Nevada (1955), North Dakota (1963, subject to tribal consent), South Dakota (1957-1961), Utah (1971), and Washington (1957-1963). Subsequent acts of Congress, court decisions, and state actions to retrocede jurisdiction back to the Federal Government have muted some of the effects of the 1953 law, and strengthened the tribes’ jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters on their reservations. III.

Tribal Government: Powers, Rights, and Authorities What are inherent powers of tribal self-government? Tribes possess all powers of self-government except those relinquished under treaty with the United States, those that Congress has expressly extinguished, and those that federal courts have ruled are subject to existing federal law or are inconsistent with overriding national policies. Tribes, therefore, possess the right to form their own governments; to make and enforce laws, both civil and criminal; to tax; to establish and determine membership (i.e., tribal citizenship); to license and regulate activities within their jurisdiction; to zone; and to exclude persons from tribal lands. Limitations on inherent tribal powers of self-government are few, but do include the same limitations applicable to states, e.g., neither tribes nor states have the power to make war, engage in foreign relations, or print and issue currency. How do tribal members govern themselves? For thousands of years, American Indians and Alaska Natives governed themselves through tribal laws, cultural traditions, religious customs, and kinship systems, such as clans and societies. Today, most modern tribal governments are organized democratically, that is, with an elected leadership.

Through their tribal governments, tribal members generally define conditions of membership, regulate domestic relations of members, prescribe rules of inheritance for reservation property not in trust status, levy taxes, regulate property under tribal jurisdiction, control the conduct of members by tribal ordinances, and administer justice. They also continue to utilize their traditional systems of self-government whenever and wherever possible. How are tribal governments organized? Most federally recognized tribes are organized under the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) of 1934 (25 U.S.C. 461 et seq.), including a number of Alaska Native villages, which adopted formal governing documents under the provisions of a 1936 amendment to the IRA. The passage in 1971 of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. 1601), however, provided for the creation of regional and village corporations under state law to manage the money and lands granted to Alaska Natives by the act. The Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936 provided for the organization of Indian tribes within the State of Oklahoma. Many tribes have constitutions, others operate under articles of association or other bodies of law, and some have found a way to combine their traditional systems of government within a modern governmental framework.

Some do not operate under any of these acts, but are nevertheless organized under documents approved by the Secretary of the Interior. Contemporary tribal governments are usually, but not always, modeled upon the federal system of the three branches: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. The chief executive of a tribe is usually called a chairman, chairwoman or chairperson, but may also be called a principal chief, governor, president, mayor, spokesperson, or representative. The chief executive presides over the tribe’s legislative body and executive branch. In modern tribal government, the chief executive and members of the tribal council or business committee are almost always elected. A tribe’s legislative body is usually called a tribal council, a village council, or a tribal business committee. It is comprised of tribal members who are elected by eligible tribal voters. In some tribes, the council is comprised of all eligible adult tribal members. Although some tribes require a referendum by their members to enact laws, a tribal council generally acts as any other legislative body in creating laws, authorizing expenditures, appropriating funds, and conducting oversight of activities carried out by the chief executive and tribal government employees.

An elected tribal council and chief executive, recognized as such by the Secretary of the Interior, have authority to speak and act for the tribe as a whole, and to represent it in negotiations with federal, state, and local governments. Furthermore, many tribes have established, or are building, their judicial branch – the tribal court system – to interpret tribal laws and administer justice. What is the jurisdiction of tribal courts? Generally, tribal courts have civil jurisdiction over Indians and non-Indians who either reside or do business on federal Indian reservations. They also have criminal jurisdiction over violations of tribal laws committed by tribal members residing or doing business on the reservation. Under 25 C.F.R. Part 115, tribal courts are responsible for appointing guardians, determining competency, awarding child support from Individual Indian Money (IIM) accounts, determining paternity, sanctioning adoptions, marriages, and divorces, making presumptions of death, and adjudicating claims involving trust assets. There are approximately 225 tribes that contract or compact with the BIA to perform the Secretary’s adjudicatory function and 23 Courts of Indian Offenses (also known as CFR courts) which exercise federal authority.

The Indian Tribal Justice Act of 1993 (P.L. 103-176, 107 Stat. 2005) supports tribal courts in becoming, along with federal and state courts, well-established dispensers of justice in Indian Country. What is meant by tribal self-determination and self-governance? Congress has recognized the right of tribes to have a greater say over the development and implementation of federal programs and policies that directly impact on them and their tribal members. It did so by enacting two major pieces of legislation that together embody the important concepts of tribal self-determination and self-governance: The Indian Self-determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, as amended (25 U.S.C. 450 et seq.) and the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 458aa et seq.). Through these laws, Congress accorded tribal governments the authority to administer themselves the programs and services usually administered by the BIA for their tribal members. It also upheld the principle of tribal consultation, whereby the federal government consults with tribes on federal actions, policies, rules or regulations that will directly affect them. IV.

Our Nation’s American Indian and Alaska Native Citizens Who is an American Indian or Alaska Native? As a general rule, an American Indian or Alaska Native person is someone who has blood degree from and is recognized as such by a federally recognized tribe or village (as an enrolled tribal member) and/or the United States. Of course, blood quantum (the degree of American Indian or Alaska Native blood from a federally recognized tribe or village that a person possesses) is not the only means by which a person is considered to be an American Indian or Alaska Native. Other factors, such as a person’s knowledge of his or her tribe’s culture, history, language, religion, familial kinships, and how strongly a person identifies himself or herself as American Indian or Alaska Native, are also important. In fact, there is no single federal or tribal criterion or standard that establishes a person's identity as American Indian or Alaska Native. There are major differences, however, when the term “American Indian” is used in an ethnological sense versus its use in a political/legal sense.

The rights, protections, and services provided by the United States to individual American Indians and Alaska Natives flow not from a person's identity as such in an ethnological sense, but because he or she is a member of a federally recognized tribe. That is, a tribe that has a government-to-government relationship and a special trust relationship with the United States. These special trust and government-to-government relationships entail certain legally enforceable obligations and responsibilities on the part of the United States to persons who are enrolled members of such tribes. Eligibility requirements for federal services will differ from program to program. Likewise, the eligibility criteria for enrollment (or membership) in a tribe will differ from tribe to tribe. How large is the national American Indian and Alaska Native population? According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the estimated population of American Indians and Alaska Natives, including those of more than one race, as of July 1, 2007, was 4.5 million, or 1.5 per cent of the total U.S. population.

In the BIA’s 2005 American Indian Population and Labor Force Report, the latest available, the total number of enrolled members of the (then) 561 federally recognized tribes was shown to be less than half the Census number, or 1,978,099. Why are American Indians and Alaska Natives also referred to as Native Americans? When referring to American Indian or Alaska Native persons, it is still appropriate to use the terms “American Indian” and “Alaska Native.” These terms denote the cultural and historical distinctions between persons belonging to the indigenous tribes of the continental United States (American Indians) and the indigenous tribes and villages of Alaska (Alaska Natives, i.e., Eskimos, Aleuts, and Indians). They also refer specifically to persons eligible for benefits and services funded or directly provided by the BIA.

The term “Native American” came into broad usage in the 1970's as an alternative to “American Indian.” Since that time, however, it has been gradually expanded within the public lexicon to include all Native peoples of the United States and its trust territories, i.e., American Indians, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiians, Chamorros, and American Samoans, as well as persons from Canada First Nations and indigenous communities in Mexico and Central and South America who are U.S. residents. Are American Indians and Alaska Natives wards of the Federal Government? No. The Federal Government is a trustee of Indian property, not a guardian of all American Indians and Alaska Natives. Although the Secretary of the Interior is authorized by law to protect, where necessary, the interests of minors and adult persons deemed incompetent to handle their affairs, this protection does not confer a guardian-ward relationship. Are American Indians and Alaska Natives citizens of the United States? Yes. As early as 1817, U.S. citizenship had been conferred by special treaty upon specific groups of Indian people. American citizenship was also conveyed by statutes, naturalization proceedings, and by service in the Armed Forces with an honorable discharge in World War I.

In 1924, Congress extended American citizenship to all other American Indians born within the territorial limits of the United States. American Indians and Alaska Natives are citizens of the United States and of the individual states, counties, cities, and towns where they reside. They can also become citizens of their tribes or villages as enrolled tribal members. Do American Indians and Alaska Natives have the right to vote? Yes. American Indians and Alaska Natives have the right to vote just as all other U.S. citizens do. They can vote in presidential, congressional, state and local, and tribal elections, if eligible. And, just as the federal government and state and local governments have the sovereign right to establish voter eligibility criteria, so do tribal governments. Do American Indians and Alaska Natives have the right to hold public office? Yes. American Indians and Alaska Natives have the same rights as other citizens to hold public office. Over the years, American Indian and Alaska Native men and women have held elected and appointed offices at all levels of federal, state, and local government.

Charles Curtis, a member of the Kaw Tribe of Kansas, served in both houses of Congress before holding the second highest elected office in the nation – that of Vice President of the United States under President Herbert Hoover. American Indians and Alaska Natives also serve in state legislatures, state judicial systems, county and city governments, and on local school boards. Do American Indians and Alaska Natives have special rights different from other citizens? Any “special” rights held by federally recognized tribes and their members are generally based on treaties or other agreements between the tribes and the United States. The heavy price American Indians and Alaska Natives paid to retain certain rights of self-government was to relinquish much of their land and resources to the United States. U.S. law protects the inherent rights they did not relinquish. Among those may be hunting and fishing rights and access to sacred sites. Do American Indians and Alaska Natives pay taxes? Yes. They pay the same taxes as other citizens with the following exceptions: Federal income taxes are not levied on income from trust lands held for them by the U.S. State income taxes are not paid on income earned on a federal Indian reservation. State sales taxes are not paid by Indians on transactions made on a federal Indian reservation.

Local property taxes are not paid on reservation or trust land. Do laws that apply to non-Indians also apply to Indians? Yes. As U.S. citizens, American Indians and Alaska Natives are generally subject to federal, state, and local laws. On federal Indian reservations, however, only federal and tribal laws apply to members of the tribe, unless Congress provides otherwise. In federal law, the Assimilative Crimes Act makes any violation of state criminal law a federal offense on reservations. Most tribes now maintain tribal court systems and facilities to detain tribal members convicted of certain offenses within the boundaries of the reservation. Do all American Indians and Alaska Natives speak a single traditional language? No. American Indians and Alaska Natives come from a multitude of different cultures with diverse languages, and for thousands of years used oral tradition to pass down familial and cultural information among generations of tribal members. Some tribes, even if widely scattered, belong to the same linguistic families. Common means of communicating between tribes allowed trade routes and political alliances to flourish. As contact between Indians and non-Indians grew, so did the necessity of learning of new languages.

Even into the 20th century, many American Indians and Alaska Natives were bi- or multilingual from learning to speak their own language and English, French, Russian, or Spanish, or even another tribal language. It has been reported that at the end of the 15th century over 300 American Indian and Alaska Native languages were spoken. Today, fewer than 200 tribal languages are still viable, with some having been translated into written form. English, however, has become the predominant language in the home, school, and workplace. Those tribes who can still do so are working to preserve their languages and create new speakers from among their tribal populations. Must all American Indians and Alaska Natives live on reservations? No. American Indians and Alaska Natives live and work anywhere in the United States (and the world) just as other citizens do. Many leave their reservations, communities or villages for the same reasons as do other Americans who move to urban centers: to seek education and employment. Over one-half of the total U.S. American Indian and Alaska Native population now live away from their tribal lands.

However, most return home to visit relatives; attend family gatherings and celebrations; participate in religious, cultural, or community activities; work for their tribal governments; operate businesses; vote in tribal elections or run for tribal office; retire; or to be buried. Do American Indians and Alaska Natives serve in the Armed Forces? Yes. American Indians and Alaska Natives have a long and distinguished history of serving in our nation’s Armed Forces. During the Civil War, American Indians served on both sides of the conflict. Among the most well-known are Brigadier General Ely S. Parker (Seneca), an aide to Union General Ulysses S. Grant who recorded the terms of Confederate General Robert E. Lee’s surrender at Appomattox Courthouse in Virginia that ended the war, and Brigadier General Stand Watie (Cherokee), the last of the Confederate generals to cease fighting after the surrender was concluded. American Indians also fought with Theodore Roosevelt in the Spanish-American War. During World War I over 8,000 American Indian soldiers, of whom 6,000 were volunteers, served. Their patriotism moved Congress to pass the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924.

In World War II, 25,000 American Indian and Alaska Native men and women fought on all fronts in Europe and the South Pacific earning, collectively, at least 71 Air Medals, 51 Silver Stars, 47 Bronze Stars, 34 Distinguished Flying Crosses, and two Congressional Medals of Honor. Alaska Natives also served in the Alaska Territorial Guard. Starting in World War I and again in World War II, the U.S. military employed a number of American Indian servicemen to use their tribal languages as a military code that could not be broken by the enemy. These “code talkers” came from many different tribes, including Chippewa, Choctaw, Creek, Crow, Comanche, Hopi, Navajo, Seminole, and Sioux. During World War II, the Navajos constituted the largest component within that elite group. In the Korean Conflict, one Congressional Medal of Honor was awarded to an American Indian serviceman. In the Vietnam War, 41,500 Indian service personnel served. In 1990, prior to Operation Desert Storm, some 24,000 Indian men and women were in the military.

Approximately 3,000 served in the Persian Gulf with three among those killed in action. American Indian service personnel have also served in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) and in Iraq (Operation Iraqi Freedom). While American Indians and Alaska Natives have the same obligations for military service as other U.S. citizens, many tribes have a strong military tradition within their cultures, and veterans are considered to be among their most honored members. V. The Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs, the BIA, and the BIE Who is the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs? The Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs (AS-IA) has responsibility for fulfilling the Interior Department’s trust responsibilities to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes and individuals, as well as promoting the self-determination and economic well-being of the tribes and their members. The Assistant Secretary together with the Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs oversee the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA); the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE); the Office of External Affairs; the Office of Federal Acknowledgment; the Office of Regulatory Management, as well as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Policy and Economic Development; and the Deputy Assistant Secretary – Management.

There have been 12 assistant secretaries since the Office of the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs was established by DOI Secretarial order in 1977. The current Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs is Larry Echo Hawk, an enrolled member of the Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma, who was confirmed by the United States Senate on May 19, 2009. The assistant secretaries for Indian Affairs are: Forrest J. Gerard, Blackfeet (1977-1980) Thomas W. Fredericks, Mandan-Hidatsa (1980-1981) Kenneth L. Smith, Wasco (1981-1984) Ross O. Swimmer, Cherokee (1985-1989) Dr. Eddie F. Brown, Tohono O’odham-Yaqui (1989-1993) Ada E. Deer, Menominee (1993-1997) Kevin Gover, Pawnee (1997-2001) David W.

Anderson, Lac Courte Oreilles Chippewa-Choctaw (2003-2005) Carl J. Artman, Oneida Tribe of Wisconsin (2007-2008) Larry Echo Hawk, Pawnee Nation of Oklahoma (2009-2012) Kevin K. Washburn, Chickasaw Nation (2012-2016) What is the Bureau of Indian Affairs? The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) is the primary federal agency charged with carrying out the United States’ trust responsibility to American Indian and Alaska Native people, maintaining the federal government-to-government relationship with the federally recognized Indian tribes, and promoting and supporting tribal self-determination. The bureau implements federal laws and policies and administers programs established for American Indians and Alaska Natives under the trust responsibility and the government-to-government relationship. What is the BIA’s history? The Continental Congress governed Indian affairs during the first years of the United States – in 1775 it established a Committee on Indian Affairs headed by Benjamin Franklin.

At the end of the eighteenth century, Congress transferred the responsibility for managing trade relations with the tribes to the Secretary of War by its act of August 20, 1789 (1 Stat. 54). An Office of Indian Trade was established in the War Department by an act of April 21, 1806 (2 Stat. 402) specifically to handle this responsibility below the secretarial level. It was later abolished by an act of May 6, 1822 (3 Stat. 679) which handed responsibility for all Indian matters back to the Secretary of War. Secretary of War John C. Calhoun administratively established the BIA within the his department on March 11, 1824. Congress later legislatively established the bureau and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs post via the act of July 9, 1832 (4 Stat. 564). In 1849, the BIA was transferred to the newly created Interior Department. In the years that followed, the Bureau was known variously as the Indian office, the Indian bureau, the Indian department, and the Indian service.

The name “Bureau of Indian Affairs” was formally adopted by the Interior Department on September 17, 1947. Since 1824 there have been 45 Commissioners of Indian Affairs of which six have been American Indian or Alaska Native: Ely S. Parker, Seneca (1869-1871); Robert L. Bennett, Oneida (1966-1969); Louis R. Bruce, Mohawk-Oglala Sioux (1969-1973); Morris Thompson, Athabascan (1973-1976); Benjamin Reifel, Sioux (1976-1977); and William E. Hallett, Red Lake Chippewa (1979-1981).

For almost 200 years—beginning with treaty agreements negotiated by the United States and tribes in the late 18th and 19th centuries, through the General Allotment Act of 1887, which opened tribal lands west of the Mississippi to non-Indian settlers, the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 when American Indians and Alaska Natives were granted U.S. citizenship and the right to vote, the New Deal and the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, which established modern tribal governments, the World War II period of relocation and the post-War termination era of the 1950s, the activism of the 1960s and 1970s that saw the takeover of the BIA’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., to the passage of landmark legislation such as the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 and the Tribal Self-Governance Act of 1994, which have fundamentally changed how the BIA and the tribes conduct business with each other—the BIA has embodied the trust and government-to-government relationships between the U.S.

and the tribal nations that bear the designation “federally recognized.” What is the BIA's relationship today with American Indians and Alaska Natives? The Bureau of Indian Affairs is a rarity among federal agencies. With roots reaching back to the the earliest days of the republic, the BIA is almost as old as the United States itself. For most of its existence, the BIA has mirrored the public's ambivalence towards the nation's indigenous people. But, as federal policy has evolved from seeking the subjugation of American Indians and Alaska Natives into one that respects tribal self-determination, so, too, has the BIA's mission evolved into one that is based on service to and partnership with the tribes. The BIA Mission Statement, which is based on principles embodied in federal treaties, laws and policies, and in judicial decisions, clearly describes the bureau's relationship today with the American Indian and Alaska Native people: "The BIA's mission is to enhance the quality of life, to promote economic opportunity, and to carry out the responsibility to protect and improve the trust assets of American Indians, Indian tribes and Alaska Natives.

We will accomplish this through the delivery of quality services, maintaining government-to-government relationships within the spirit of self-determination." How does the BIA carry out its mission? Today, in keeping with their authorities and responsibilities under the Snyder Act of 1921 and other federal laws, regulations, and treaties, BIA employees across the country work with tribal governments in the administration of employment and job training assistance; law enforcement and justice; agricultural and economic development; tribal governance; and natural resources management programs to enhance the quality of life in tribal communities. The following are just some examples of what we do: We provide funding to and administer government program services for the federally recognized American Indian and Alaska Native tribes located in 34 states, and through them to their approximately 1.9 million members. We work with tribes in the administration of approximately 56 million acres of trust land, and the natural resources therein, for the use and benefit of the tribes and individual Indians. We maintain five law enforcement district offices nationwide to provide police protection and investigative services for both Indian and non-Indians living in Indian Country. We also directly operate or fund tribally operated law enforcement programs, courts, and detention facilities in tribal communities across the U.S.

We build and maintain thousands of miles of roads, as well as bridges, dams, and other physical infrastructure throughout Indian Country which benefit both Indians and non-Indians alike. We work with other federal, tribal, state, and local emergency personnel in responses to wildland fires and other natural disasters. We administer the Guaranteed Indian Loan Program to stimulate, increase, and sustain Indian entrepreneurship and business development in tribal communities. We assist tribes in administering federal economic development and employment and training programs. We administer BIA programs for tribes unable or who choose not to operate those programs. We directly serve thousands of individual Indian trust beneficiaries by providing assistance in the probating of Indian trust estates, administering leases approved by the Secretary of the Interior, and performing other fiduciary duties. Until 1955, the BIA’s responsibilities included providing health care services to American Indians and Alaska Natives. That year, the function was legislatively transferred as the Indian Health Service to the U.S. Public Health Service within the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, known now as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), where it has remained to this day. What is the Bureau of Indian Education?

The Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), formerly known as the Office of Indian Education Programs (OIEP), is under the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs. It is responsible for the line direction and management of all BIE education functions, including the formation of policies and procedures, the supervision of all program activities, and the approval of the expenditure of funds appropriated for BIE education functions. The BIE mission, which can be found in 25 C.F.R. Part 32.3, states that the BIE is to provide quality education opportunities from early childhood through life in accordance with the tribe’s needs for cultural and economic well-being in keeping with the wide diversity of Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages as distinct cultural and governmental entities. The BIE also shall manifest consideration of the whole person by taking into account the spiritual, mental, physical, and cultural aspects of the person within his or her family and tribal or village context. The BIE school system has 184 elementary and secondary schools and dormitories located on 63 reservations in 23 states, including seven off-reservation boarding schools and 122 schools directly controlled by tribes and tribal school boards under contracts or grants with the BIE.

The bureau also funds 66 residential programs for students at 52 boarding schools and at 14 dormitories housing those attending nearby tribal or public schools. The school system employs approximately 5,000 teachers, administrators, and support personnel, while an estimated 6,600 work in tribal school systems. In School Year 2006-07, the schools served almost 48,000 students. In the area of postsecondary education, the BIE provides support to 24 tribal colleges and universities across the U.S. serving over 25,000 students, and directly operates two institutions of higher learning: the Haskell Indian Nations University (HINU) in Lawrence, Kansas, and the Southwest Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI) in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It also operates higher education scholarship programs for American Indians and Alaska Natives. There have been three major legislative actions that restructured the Bureau of Indian Affairs with regard to education since the Snyder Act of 1921.

The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 introduced the teaching of Indian history and culture in BIA schools, which contrasted with the federal policy at the time of acculturating and assimilating Indian people through the BIA boarding school system. The Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 90-638) gave authority to the tribes to contract with the BIA for the operation of local schools and to determine education programs suitable for their children. The Education Amendments Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-561) and further technical amendments (P.L. 98-511, 99-89, and 100-297) provided funds directly to tribal schools, empowered Indian school boards, permitted local hiring of teachers and staff, and established a direct line of authority between the OIEP Director and the Assistant Secretary – Indian Affairs. In 2001, Congress passed the No Child Left Behind Act (P.L. 107-110) to bring additional requirements of accountability and academic achievement for supplemental program funds provided by the U.S.

Department of Education through the OIEP to the schools. In 2006, the OIEP was formally elevated to bureau status by secretarial action and renamed the Bureau of Indian Education. For additional information To obtain contact information for the Federally recognized tribes, click on the “ Tribal Leaders Directory ” link. For information about tracing American Indian or Alaska Native ancestry to any of the federally recognized tribes, click on the “ Trace Indian Ancestry ” link. For information about the U.S. Indian Health Service, visit or call the IHS Public Affairs Office at (301) 443-3593. Choose A Category Regions Click the map to view our regions and their office contact information and the tribes served by that region Mailing Address:

Question: What is the largest Native American tribe in the United States?
Answer: Cherokee