American Indian Law Review Volume 36 | Number 2 1-1-2012 Territory, Wilderness, Property, and Reservation: Land and Religion in Native American Supreme Court Cases Kathleen Sands Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, First Amendment Commons, and the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation Kathleen Sands, Territory, Wilderness, Property, and Reservation: Land and Religion in Native American Supreme Court Cases, 36 Am. Indian L. Rev. 253 (2012), https://digitalcommons.law.ou.edu/ailr/vol36/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in American Indian Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Oklahoma College of Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. TERRITORY, WILDERNESS, PROPERTY, AND RESERVATION: LAND AND RELIGION IN NATIVE AMERICAN SUPREME COURT CASES Kathleen Sands* Abstract In two trilogies of Supreme Court decisions, both involving Native Americans, land is a key metaphor, figuring variously as property, territory, wilderness, and reservation. The first trilogy, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, comprises Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831), and Worcester v. Georgia (1832). The second trilogy concerns Native American claims for religious freedom under the First Amendment and includes Bowen v. Roy (1986), Lyng v. Northwest Cemetery Protective Association (1988), and Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith (1990). The Marshall cases attempted to legitimate the transformation of land from wilderness to territory and property, and in this sense, they appeared "secular." These cases also were "religious" in an important sense: they created a myth of origins that determined the polity's relation to the land and people on which it was built.