Last Updated on November 13, 2011
The U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear two Indian law cases on Monday, closing the doors on a contentious sovereignty case and another tribal land claim.
In the first case, the justices rejected an appeal from the Narragansett Tribe of Rhode Island. The tribe’s reservation was raided by state troopers, who arrested tribal leaders and members, seized tribal property and shut down a smoke shop.
In the second, the justices refused to consider the Delaware Nation’s claim to 315 acres in Pennsylvania. The tribe, based in Oklahoma, wanted to trade its land for gaming rights in what has become a controversial practice.
Narragansett Tribe v. Rhode Island, No. 06-414
On July 14, 2003, television stations nationwide broadcast a violent raid of the Narragansett Reservation. State troopers, acting on orders from Gov. Donald Carcieri (R), went there to shut down a smoke shop that was selling tobacco products without a state tax.
The tribe sued the state, claiming its rights were violated. In a May 2005 ruling, a three-judge panel of the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals agreed that the raid trampled on tribal sovereignty but said the state could impose taxes on the reservation, and recommended a compact.
After a rehearing, the 1st Circuit issued an even broader ruling this past May. By a 4-2 vote, the court said the state can enforce all of its laws on the reservation, citing a land claim settlement approved back in 1983.
The tribe subsequently filed a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. Without comment, the justices denied the writ, upholding the 1st Circuit ruling that could set precedent for other tribes in Maine and Massachusetts that signed similar land claim settlements.
But the issue could come up again with another case in the 1st Circuit. Land taken into trust outside the Narragansett’s land claim area could remain out of reach of state laws depending how the court rules.
There’s also the open question whether acts of Congress that granted state jurisdiction over Indian Country apply to the actions of tribal governments and not just tribal members. The Supreme Court failed to resolve that dispute in another state raid case back in 2003.
From indianz.com (See this link for Court Rulings and related stories)
Across the world right now, Indigenous peoples are facing a renewed assault on their lands, rights, and ways of life.
From extractive industries pushing deeper into ancestral territories, to governments rolling back hard-won protections,
the threat is global—and it is growing.
What makes this moment especially dangerous is how little attention it receives.
Stories like this are disappearing in real time. Mainstream media
barely covers it and the coverage is fragmented. The public is left without the context
needed to understand what is truly at stake.
That is exactly why IC Magazine exists..
For more than 20 years, IC has reported on Indigenous struggles worldwide — consistently, independently, and without compromise.
We don’t follow news cycles; we trace patterns. We don’t sensationalize; we provide context.
And when the world looks away, we stay focused.
But this work is increasingly difficult to sustain.
We refuse to lock our reporting behind a paywall. We don’t sell access through subscriptions.
And we don’t answer to advertisers. IC Magazine survives solely because readers like you choose to
support independent Indigenous journalism.
Please donate today if you can. Every contribution helps us to continue this crucial work.
Thank you,
John Ahni Schertow
Founder and Editor in Chief
