Indians of the United States. Four Centuries of Their History and Culture. By Clark Wissler. New York: Doubleday, Doran and Co., Inc., 1940. 319 pp. $3.75. Illustrated and Acculturation in Seven American Indian Tribes. Edited by Ralph Linton. New York: D. Appleton-Century Co., 1940. 516 pp. $4.00

Social Forces ◽  
1940 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-118
Author(s):  
F. Eggan
Elements ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Mooney

Federalism has played an important role in the explosion of legalized gambling in the United States in the last two decades. Indian gaming, in particular, has challenged state and national governments to come to terms with the place of American Indian tribes within the federalist system and organize a meaningful framework for the expansion of gaming on tribal lands. Now largely controlled by a federal statutory framework, Indian gaming has left states in a subordinate position in negotiating the establisment of major casino enterprises within their own borders. Confusion in states' rights during negotiations has further weakened their bargaining position, leading to extensive tribal casino development. The cooperation between states and tribes and states and casino corporations have facilitated casino proliferation throughout the United States, a trend that appears destined to contiue until the market is fully saturated.


Anthropology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leo Killsback

Federal Indian law (FIL), also known as American Indian law, is the body of doctrine that regulates the political relationship between American Indian and Alaska Native governments and the federal government. FIL is best understood as the development of this “government-to-government” relationship, which intersects with other bodies of law like constitutional law, criminal law, and environmental law. FIL is comprised of legal doctrines, statutes, judicial decisions, treaties, and executive orders, all of which have direct influences on the rights and sovereignty of Indian tribes. In the United States there are 573 federally recognized tribes that are subject to the rights and privileges, as well as the consequences, of FIL. These federally recognized tribes are the third sovereign authority in the United States—the other two are states and the federal government—that retain inherent rights and that exercise and enjoy sovereignty and self-governance on their own lands. The historical development of FIL in the United States constitutes an important starting point in understanding the special relationship between Indian tribes and the federal government. The origins of FIL lay in three US Supreme Court cases known as the “Marshall trilogy,” after Chief Justice John Marshall, the presiding chief justice of Johnson v. McIntosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). At that time, the primary questions centered on the sovereign rights of Indian tribes, that is, whether Indians have dominion over themselves and their lands. Throughout the development of FIL, until today, questions of Indian tribal sovereignty—or Indigenous nation sovereignty—remained contentious as Indians continued to fight for treaty rights, autonomy, and self-determination. FIL can be described as a series of wins and losses for American Indians in their fight for sovereign rights. In the end, however, the study of FIL is equally the study of how the United States was able to legally subjugate America’s indigenous peoples and acquire their lands. FIL is basically the study of America’s justification for Native America’s colonization and the genocide perpetrated against American Indians. The literature on FIL or American Indian law is vast, but the most valuable resources are authored by and for attorneys and for students of law. Although the disciplines of Native American and Indigenous studies encompass facets of American Indian and Indigenous peoples’ lives, scholarship in FIL has proven to be beneficial. The resources cited in this article represent some of the widely used texts that provide a solid foundation for studies in FIL.


1979 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 421-439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances Svensson

Individualism is the foundation of democratic theory and practise in the United States. A multi-ethnic, but not really a multi-communal society in the same sense as Northern Ireland or India, the United States has not generally had to confront the nature and justification of its historical opposition to group rights and communal social and political organization. Only the American Indian tribes, with their treaty-mandated communalism, have presented exceptions to this pattern. This paper explores the assumptions underlying liberal democratic attitudes towards communalism, the ways in which group claims pose challenges to conventional notions of justice and equality, and the utility of introducing alternative assumptions about the nature and role of groups in democratic society. Discussion centers on the most recent attempt to reduce the group rights of American Indian tribes.


1982 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-430 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Anthony Ryan

The federal role in American Indian education has its basis in the treaty and commerce clauses of the U.S. Constitution. In the early years of the republic it was recognized that, in the interest of protecting the borders of the Western frontier, the cost of war with the Indians was much higher than the cost of education. Until 1871, in accordance with international law, the United States treated with Indian tribes as separate nations. Commissioners appointed by the President frequently negotiated treaties with specific provisions for education, whose Christianizing and civilizing functions were perceived to be instrumental in obtaining amicable relations. Through the quid pro quo of the treaty process, the United States and Indian tribes established their peculiar relationship. This required that tribes surrender their external powers of sovereignty to the United States. Generally, this meant that they would not engage in treaties with competitive foreign powers such as Great Britain, France, or Spain. Treaties also acknowledged a federal title to their lands, subject to their rights of occupancy. When tribes ceded certain tracts of land that they already occupied, they were permitted to retain their internal powers of sovereignty and to receive financial consideration through specific treaty provisions and through a more generalized duty of care and protection from the United States. As a result, specific and general treaty provisions on education promised to educate American Indians. Appropriation acts pursuant to specific treaty provisions and for the Civilization Fund confirmed the basis and became the policy of the United States in its early federal role in American Indian education.


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 123-132
Author(s):  
Debbie Reese

This commentary essay examines several individuals who wrote books for children and made claims to Native identity that are fraudulent, or otherwise problematic. Asa Carter, for example, posed as a Cherokee named “Forrest Carter” and published The Education of Little Tree, put forth as the autobiography of someone who had been on the Trail of Tears. So popular that it was published in Korean, Turkish, Czeck, Slovenian, and Spanish, in 1997 Little Tree became a feature film. Although the author’s fraud was exposed in The New York Times, the book continues to be published. Jamake Highwater, posing as a Blackfoot/Cherokee, won the most prestigious children’s literature award, the Newbery Honor given by the American Library Association, for Anpao: An American Indian Odyssey, in 1978. Paul Goble is a British writer who loved American Indian stories so much that he moved to the United States to live near Plains tribes, where he was given a Native name. Both that name and the ways he spoke of the gift led people to believe that he had been adopted into the Lakota tribe. Like Carter and Highwater, but more prolific, Goble’s books sell well in a market that retains narrow and stereotypical views of Native peoples. The essay concludes by discussing the ways that the works of Carter, Highwater, and Goble impact publishing today.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document