DOCSLIB.ORG

Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: Changing the Balance of Power

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: Changing the Balance of Power Volume 39 Issue 3 Article 1 1994 Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: Changing the Balance of Power Katharine F. Nelson Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Katharine F. Nelson, Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: Changing the Balance of Power, 39 Vill. L. Rev. 525 (1994). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol39/iss3/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Villanova Law Review by an authorized editor of Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository. Nelson: Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW VOLUME 39 1994 NUMBER 3 RESOLVING NATIVE AMERICAN LAND CLAIMS AND THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT: CHANGING THE BALANCE OF POWER KATHARINE F. NELSON* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ........................................... 526 II. INDIAN TITLE AND THE NONINTERCOURSE ACT ........... 530 III. THE HISTORY OF TRIBAL ACCESS TO THE FEDERAL COURTS ................................................... 533 A. Before Oneida I and II. ....................... 533 B. O neida I .......................................... 542 C. O neida II ......................................... 543 IV. NEGOTIATED SETTLEMENTS ............................... 546 A. Land Claims ....................................... 546 B. Defenses in Land Claim Actions ..................... 552 C. Negotiated Settlements ............................... 556 D. Examples of Negotiated Land Claim Settlements ....... 563 1. Rhode Island Indian Land Claims Settlement ...... 563 a. Background ................................ 563 b. Settlement Terms .......................... 565 c. Evaluation ................................. 568 2. Puyallup Land Claims Settlement ................. 570 a. Background ................................ 570 b. Settlement Terms ........................... 572 c. An Example of Mutually Beneficial N egotiations ................................ 575 3. Seneca-Salamanca Lease Settlement ................ 578 a. Background ................................ 578 * Associate Professor, Widener University School of Law; B.A., University of Rochester; MA., Columbia University Teachers College; J.D., Syracuse University College of Law. Copyright 1994. I would like to thank Elizabeth Paige Spencer and John Doncevic, my student research assistants, for their help in researching and editing this article. (525) Published by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository, 1994 1 Villanova Law Review, Vol. 39, Iss. 3 [1994], Art. 1 526 VILLANOVA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 39: p. 525 b. Settlement Terms .......................... 582 c. Afterm ath .................................. 585 E. The State's Role in Settlement Negotiations ............ 588 V. THE ELEVENTH AMENDMENT ............................. 589 A. Eleventh Amendment Protection ...................... 590 B. Exceptions to Eleventh Amendment Immunity .......... 593 1. Consent ........................................ 593 2. The Ex ParteYoung Fiction and Prospective Injunctive Relief ................................ 594 3. Abrogation Under the Fourteenth Amendment ...... 597 4. Abrogation Under Article I ................... 598 a. Pennsylvania v. Union Gas Co................ 599 b. Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak ......... 605 c. Abrogation Under the Indian Commerce Clause ... ................................. 609 VI. THE IMPACT OF THE STATES' ELEVENTH AMENDMENT IMMUNITY ON RESOLVING INDIAN LAND CLAIMS .......... 612 A. Land Claim Actions Against the State ................ 612 B. Actions Against State Officials to Enforce Property Rights ............................................. 615 C. Land Claim Actions Against Non-State Landholders ... 617 D. Impact on Land Claim Settlements .................... 619 VII. CONCLUSION .......................................... 623 I. INTRODUCTION It can be argued that the Indian right to aboriginal land is fundamental because land is the basis of all things Indian. The relationship of a tribe to its land defines the tribe: its identity, its culture, its way of life, and its methods of adap- tation. Since tribal existence is central to personal Indian selfhood, the very existence of an Indian people is largely dependent on the recognition and protection of Indian property rights.1 You are not hostages in our house. We don't hold you here. But we do recognize the fact that you are in our house. We have people who are working on settling the dispute as to how you should live in our house.2 1. Nell Jessup Newton, FederalPower over Indians: Its Sources, Scope, and Limita- tions, 132 U. PA. L. REiv. 195, 252 (1984). 2. Irving Powless, Jr., The Sovereignty and Land Rights of the Houdenosaunee, in https://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/vlr/vol39/iss3/1 2 Nelson: Resolving Native American Land Claims and the Eleventh Amendment: 1994] CHANGING THE BALANCE OF POWER S the United States looks forward to the twenty-first century, any localities still face Native American land claims. Some of these claims are over 200 years old. The United States Supreme Court's 1991 holding in Blatchford v. Native Village of Noatak3 -that the states enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity from suits by In- dian tribes 4-may further hinder settlement of these disputes be- cause it alters the balance of power between the states and Native claimants. Federal common law, statutes and treaties recognize and pro- tect Native American rights to occupy and use tribal lands.5 These are among the most important interests that Native Americans hold and still form the basis for much of today's Indian policy. Unfortu- nately, the sorry history of Indian relations in this country has too often been, and continues to be, marred by government and pri- 6 vate exploitation of Native American property rights. Native Americans have a unique status in the United States that is unlike other ethnic and racial minorities. They are neither assim- ilated nor independent sovereigns. Instead, Indian tribes are con- sidered "dependent domestic nations."7 As such, their ability to IROQUOIS LAND CLAIMS 155, 160-61 (Christopher Vecsey & William A. Stama eds., 1988) (The author is a chief of the Houdenosaunee [Iroquois Confederacy] Grand Council). 3. 501 U.S. 775 (1991). 4. Id. at 782-88. 5. See, e.g., Indian Trade and Intercourse Act, 25 U.S.C. § 177 (1988) [herein- after Nonintercourse Act] (barring alienation of Native American lands without federal government's consent); Treaty at Canandaigua, Nov. 11, 1794, U.S.-Six Na- tions, art. II, III, 7 Stat. 44 (acknowledging lands reserved to Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga and Seneca Nations in New York State); Treaty of Fort Stanwix, Oct. 22, 1784, U.S.-Six Nations, art. II, III, 7 Stat. 15 (securing Iroquois Confederacy Na- tions' possession of their lands within what is now New York State); County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation, 470 U.S. 226, 233-40 (1985) [hereinafter Oneida II] (recognizing cause of action under federal common law); Oneida Indian Na- tion v. County of Oneida, 414 U.S. 661, 669-70 (1974) [hereinafter Oneida 1] (find- ing federal question jurisdiction). 6. Modem' day examples include usurping reservation water rights, deposit- ing hazardous wastes on tribal lands and taking tribal land by eminent domain for public works projects. 7. Chief Justice John Marshall described Indian tribes as follows: Though the Indians are acknowledged to have an unquestionable, and heretofore unquestioned, right to the lands they occupy, until that right shall be extinguished by a voluntary cession to our government; yet it may well be doubted, whether those tribes which reside within the ac- knowledged boundaries of the United States can, with strict accuracy, be denominated foreign nations. They may, more correctly, perhaps, be de- nominated domestic dependent nations. They occupy a territory to which we assert a title independent of their will, which must take effect in point of possession, when their right of possession ceases. Meanwhile, Published by Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law Digital Repository, 1994 3 Villanova Law Review, Vol. 39, Iss. 3 [1994], Art. 1 VILLANOVA LAW REviEW [Vol. 39: p. 525 protect their rights has often been limited.8 Until relatively re- cently, tribal access to the federal judicial system was restricted or nonexistent. Indian tribes were often forced to rely on the federal government to assert their rights under the Indian/government trust doctrine or resort to self-help. In 1966, Congress enacted the Indian jurisdiction statute. 9 This statute gave the federal district courts original jurisdiction over civil claims by recognized Indian tribes arising under the Constitu- tion, laws or treaties of the United States, without regard to the amount in controversy.10 In the 1970s, tribes began filing actions in federal court asserting possessory rights to millions of acres of an- cestral land long since acquired by the states and currently occu- pied by private citizens, businesses, municipalities, counties and the states.1 In a series of decisions culminating with County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation (Oneida I1),12 the United States Supreme Court eliminated most of the procedural hurdles that had plagued Indian land claims. It soon became apparent that many of these
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Indians (2)” of the John G
    The original documents are located in Box 4, folder “Indians (2)” of the John G. Carlson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Digitized from Box 4 of the John G. Carlson Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON January 8, 1974 Dear Chief Fools Crow and Matthew Kirig: On behalf of the President, I want to thank you for your letter of November 19 to him, and for the specific questions you enclosed in the Bill of Particulars which Vine DeLoria delivered to Brad Patterson. We promised to have a detailed response to the specific questions, and the enclosure to this letter, prepared principally by the Department of Justice, constitutes that response. As you asked, the response avoids rhetoric and" soothing words" in its answers and confines itself to facts of history and law, with citations of statutes and Court decisions. By way of preface, however, I would like to add a personal word.
    [Show full text]
  • Nysba Spring 2020 | Vol
    NYSBA SPRING 2020 | VOL. 31 | NO. 2 Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Journal A publication of the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section of the New York State Bar Association In This Issue n A Case of “Creative Destruction”: Takeaways from the 5Pointz Graffiti Dispute n The American Actress, the English Duchess, and the Privacy Litigation n The Battle Against the Bots: The Legislative Fight Against Ticket Bots ....and more www.nysba.org/EASL NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION In The Arena: A Sports Law Handbook Co-sponsored by the New York State Bar Association and the Entertainment, Arts and Sports Law Section As the world of professional athletics has become more competitive and the issues more complex, so has the need for more reliable representation in the field of sports law. Written by dozens of sports law attorneys and medical professionals, In the Arena: A Sports Law Handbook is a reflection of the multiple issues that face athletes and the attorneys who represent them. Included in this book are chapters on representing professional athletes, NCAA enforcement, advertising, sponsorship, intellectual property rights, doping, concussion-related issues, Title IX and dozens of useful appendices. Table of Contents Intellectual Property Rights and Endorsement Agreements How Trademark Protection Intersects with the Athlete’s EDITORS Right of Publicity Elissa D. Hecker, Esq. Collective Bargaining in the Big Three David Krell, Esq. Agency Law Sports, Torts and Criminal Law PRODUCT INFO AND PRICES 2013 | 539 pages Role of Advertising and Sponsorship in the Business of Sports PN: 4002 (Print) Doping in Sport: A Historical and Current Perspective PN: 4002E (E-Book) Athlete Concussion-Related Issues Non-Members $80 Concussions—From a Neuropsychological and Medical Perspective NYSBA Members $65 In-Arena Giveaways: Sweepstakes Law Basics and Compliance Issues Order multiple titles to take advantage of our low flat Navigating the NCAA Enforcement Process rate shipping charge of $5.95 per order, regardless of the number of items shipped.
    [Show full text]
  • Delaware Indian Land Claims: a Historical and Legal Perspective
    Delaware Indian land Claims: A Historical and Legal Perspective DAVID A. EZZO Alden, New York and MICHAEL MOSKOWITZ Wantagh, New York In this paper we shall discuss Delaware Indian land claims in both a histori­ cal and legal context. The first section of the paper deals with the historical background necessary to understand the land claims filed by the Delaware. In the second part of the paper the focus is on a legal review of the Delaware land claims cases. Ezzo is responsible for the first section while Moskowitz is responsible for the second section. 1. History The term Delaware has been used to describe the descendants of the Native Americans that resided in the Delaware River Valley and other adjacent areas at the start of the 17th century. The Delaware spoke two dialects: Munsee and Unami, both of these belong to the Eastern Algonquian Lan­ guage family. Goddard has noted that the Delaware never formed a single political unit. He also has noted that the term Delaware was only applied to these groups after they had migrated from their original Northeastern homeland. Goddard sums up the Delaware migration as follows: The piecemeal western migration, in the face of white settlement and its attendant pressures during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, left the Delaware in a number of widely scattered places in Southern Ontario, Western New York, Wisconsin, Kansas and Oklahoma. Their history involves the repeated divisions and consolidations of many villages and of local, political and linguistic groups that developed in complicated and incompletely known ways. In addition, individuals, families and small groups were constantly moving from place to place.
    [Show full text]
  • The Legacy of Solem V. Bartlett: How Courts Have Used Demographics to Bypass Congress and Erode the Basic Principles of Indian Law
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by UW Law Digital Commons (University of Washington) Washington Law Review Volume 84 Number 4 11-1-2009 The Legacy of Solem v. Bartlett: How Courts Have Used Demographics to Bypass Congress and Erode the Basic Principles of Indian Law Charlene Koski Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr Part of the Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons Recommended Citation Charlene Koski, Comment, The Legacy of Solem v. Bartlett: How Courts Have Used Demographics to Bypass Congress and Erode the Basic Principles of Indian Law, 84 Wash. L. Rev. 723 (2009). Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uw.edu/wlr/vol84/iss4/5 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews and Journals at UW Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Washington Law Review by an authorized editor of UW Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Koski_DTPed[1].docx (Do Not Delete) 11/23/2009 12:52 PM Copyright © 2009 by Washington Law Review Association THE LEGACY OF SOLEM V. BARTLETT: HOW COURTS HAVE USED DEMOGRAPHICS TO BYPASS CONGRESS AND ERODE THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INDIAN LAW Charlene Koski Abstract: Only Congress has authority to change a reservation’s boundaries, so when disputes arise over whether land is part of a reservation, courts turn to congressional intent. The challenge is that in many cases, Congress expressed its intent to diminish or disestablish a reservation as long as one hundred years ago through a series of “surplus land acts.”1 To help courts with their task, the Supreme Court in Solem v.
    [Show full text]
  • Southern Division Little Traverse Bay Bands Of
    Case 1:15-cv-00850-PLM-PJG ECF No. 610 filed 04/29/19 PageID.11737 Page 1 of 66 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN – SOUTHERN DIVISION LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY BANDS OF ODAWA INDIANS, a federally recognized Indian tribe, Plaintiff, v. Court File No.15-cv-850 Hon. Paul L. Maloney Gretchen WHITMER, Governor of the State of Michigan, et al., Defendants. Tribe’s Response in Opposition to Municipal Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment William A. Szotkowski James A. Bransky Jessica Intermill 9393 Lake Leelanau Dr. Andrew Adams III Traverse City, MI 49684 Hogen Adams PLLC Phone: (231) 946-5241 1935 W. County Rd. B2, Ste. 460 E-mail: [email protected] St. Paul, MN 55113 Phone: (651) 842-9100 Donna Budnick E-mail: [email protected] 7500 Odawa Cir. [email protected] Harbor Springs, MI 49740 [email protected] Phone: (231) 242-1424 [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Counsel for Plaintiff Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians Case 1:15-cv-00850-PLM-PJG ECF No. 610 filed 04/29/19 PageID.11738 Page 2 of 66 Table of Contents I. Factual Background .................................................................................................. 1 A. The Land .......................................................................................................................1 B. The Treaties ..................................................................................................................5 1. March 28, 1836: The Treaty of Washington ..........................................................
    [Show full text]
  • PETITION Ror,RECOGNITION of the FLORIDA TRIBE Or EASTERN CREEK INDIANS
    'l PETITION rOR,RECOGNITION OF THE FLORIDA TRIBE or EASTERN CREEK INDIANS TH;: FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS and the Administra­ tive Council, THE NORTHWEST FLORIDA CREEK INDIAN COUNCIL brings this, thew petition to the DEPARTMENT Or THE INTERIOR OF THE FEDERAL GOVERN- MENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and prays this honorable nation will honor their petition, which is a petition for recognition by this great nation that THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS is an Indian Tribe. In support of this plea for recognition THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS herewith avers: (1) THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS nor any of its members, is the subject of Congressional legislation which has expressly terminated or forbidden the Federal relationship sought. (2) The membership of THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS is composed principally of persons who are not members of any other North American Indian tribe. (3) A list of all known current members of THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEK INDIANS, based on the tribes acceptance of these members and the tribes own defined membership criteria is attached to this petition and made a part of it. SEE APPENDIX----- A The membership consists of individuals who are descendants of the CREEK NATION which existed in aboriginal times, using and occuping this present georgraphical location alone, and in conjunction with other people since that time. - l - MNF-PFD-V001-D0002 Page 1of4 (4) Attached herewith and made a part of this petition is the present governing Constitution of THE FLORIDA TRIBE OF EASTERN CREEKS INDIANS.
    [Show full text]
  • BROKEN PROMISES: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans
    U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS BROKEN PROMISES: Continuing Federal Funding Shortfall for Native Americans BRIEFING REPORT U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS Washington, DC 20425 Official Business DECEMBER 2018 Penalty for Private Use $300 Visit us on the Web: www.usccr.gov U.S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION The U.S. Commission on Civil Rights is an independent, Catherine E. Lhamon, Chairperson bipartisan agency established by Congress in 1957. It is Patricia Timmons-Goodson, Vice Chairperson directed to: Debo P. Adegbile Gail L. Heriot • Investigate complaints alleging that citizens are Peter N. Kirsanow being deprived of their right to vote by reason of their David Kladney race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national Karen Narasaki origin, or by reason of fraudulent practices. Michael Yaki • Study and collect information relating to discrimination or a denial of equal protection of the laws under the Constitution Mauro Morales, Staff Director because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin, or in the administration of justice. • Appraise federal laws and policies with respect to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW because of race, color, religion, sex, age, disability, or Washington, DC 20425 national origin, or in the administration of justice. (202) 376-8128 voice • Serve as a national clearinghouse for information TTY Relay: 711 in respect to discrimination or denial of equal protection of the laws because of race, color, www.usccr.gov religion, sex, age, disability, or national origin. • Submit reports, findings, and recommendations to the President and Congress.
    [Show full text]
  • Reply Brief of Plaintiff-Appellant Oneida Nation
    Case: 19-1981 Document: 45 Filed: 12/09/2019 Pages: 54 No. 19-1981 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ONEIDA NATION, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. VILLAGE OF HOBART, WISCONSIN, Defendant-Appellee. _______________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, No. 1:16-cv-01217-WCG. The Honorable William C. Griesbach, Judge Presiding. REPLY BRIEF OF PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT ONEIDA NATION ARLINDA F. LOCKLEAR (Counsel of Record) PAUL R. JACQUART 4113 Jenifer Street, NW JESSICA C. MEDERSON Washington, DC 20015 HANSEN REYNOLDS LLC (202) 237-0933 301 North Broadway, Suite 400 Milwaukee, WI 53202 JAMES R. BITTORF (414) 455-7676 KELLY M. MCANDREWS ONEIDA LAW OFFICE VANYA S. HOGEN N7210 Seminary Road WILLIAM A. SZOTKOWSKI P.O. Box 109 HOGEN ADAMS PLLC Oneida, WI 54155 1935 West County Rd. B2, Suite 460 (920) 869-4327 St. Paul, MN 55113 (651) 842-9100 Counsel for Plaintiff-Appellant COUNSEL PRESS ∙ (866) 703-9373 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Case: 19-1981 Document: 45 Filed: 12/09/2019 Pages: 54 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ........................................................................................................ iii ARGUMENT ..................................................................................................................................1 I. The Supreme Court has explicitly rejected the Village’s diminishment theory ......1 A. The Supreme Court has repeatedly construed the Dawes Act, and allotment of reservations thereunder, as leaving reservations intact............3 B. The Supreme Court has construed the Indian country statute to reject the Village’s distinction between non-Indian fee patents acquired from allottees and those acquired under a surplus lands act ............................................................................................................................9 C. The Supreme Court’s most recent case on reservation diminishment rejected the Village’s “extreme allotment” diminishment theory ...............12 II.
    [Show full text]
  • Flying the Line Flying the Line the First Half Century of the Air Line Pilots Association
    Flying the Line Flying the Line The First Half Century of the Air Line Pilots Association By George E. Hopkins The Air Line Pilots Association Washington, DC International Standard Book Number: 0-9609708-1-9 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 82-073051 © 1982 by The Air Line Pilots Association, Int’l., Washington, DC 20036 All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First Printing 1982 Second Printing 1986 Third Printing 1991 Fourth Printing 1996 Fifth Printing 2000 Sixth Printing 2007 Seventh Printing 2010 CONTENTS Chapter 1: What’s a Pilot Worth? ............................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Stepping on Toes ...................................................................... 9 Chapter 3: Pilot Pushing .......................................................................... 17 Chapter 4: The Airmail Pilots’ Strike of 1919 ........................................... 23 Chapter 5: The Livermore Affair .............................................................. 30 Chapter 6: The Trouble with E. L. Cord .................................................. 42 Chapter 7: The Perils of Washington ........................................................ 53 Chapter 8: Flying for a Rogue Airline ....................................................... 67 Chapter 9: The Rise and Fall of the TWA Pilots Association .................... 78 Chapter 10: Dave Behncke—An American Success Story ......................... 92 Chapter 11: Wartime.............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Systematic Identification and Articulation of Content Standards and Benchmarks. Update. INSTITUTION Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab., Aurora, CO
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 403 308 TM 026 040 AUTHOR Kendall, John S.; Marzano, Robert J. TITLE The Systematic Identification and Articulation of Content Standards and Benchmarks. Update. INSTITUTION Mid-Continent Regional Educational Lab., Aurora, CO. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE Mar 95 CONTRACT RP91002005 NOTE 598p. AVAILABLE FROM Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402. PUB TYPE Legal/Legislative/Regulatory Materials (090) Reports Descriptive (141) EDRS PRICE MF03/PC24 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS Art; *Course Content; *Educational Improvement; Elementary Secondary Education; Geography Instruction; Health Education; History Instruction; *Identification; Language Arts; Mathematics Education; Science Education; *Standards; Thinking Skills IDENTIFIERS *Benchmarking; *Subject Content Knowledge ABSTRACT The project described in this paper addresses the major issues surrounding content standards, provides a model for their identification, and applies this model to identify standards and benchmarks in subject areas. This update includes a revision of content standards and benchmarks published in, earlier updates and the synthesis and identification of standards in new areas. Standards and benchmarks are provided for science, mathematics, history, geography, the arts, the language arts, and health. Also included are standards in thinking and reasoning and an analysis and description of knowledge and skills considered important for the workplace. Following an introduction, the second section presents an overview of the current efforts towards standards in each of these subject areas. Section 3 describes the technical and conceptual differences that have been apparent in the standards movement and the model adopted for this study. Section 4 presents key questions that should be addressed by schools and districts interested in a standards-based strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Maine Indian Land Claim Settlement: a Personal Recollection
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Maine Maine History Volume 46 Number 2 Land and Labor Article 5 6-1-2012 The Maine Indian Land Claim Settlement: A Personal Recollection John M.R. Paterson Bernstein, Shur Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistoryjournal Part of the Cultural Heritage Law Commons, Cultural History Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Indigenous Studies Commons, Legal Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Social History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Paterson, John M.. "The Maine Indian Land Claim Settlement: A Personal Recollection." Maine History 46, 2 (2012): 195-225. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistoryjournal/vol46/iss2/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE MAINE INDIAN LAND CLAIM SETTLEMENT: A PERSONAL RECOLLECTION BY JOHN M.R. PATERSON From 1971 to 1980, the state of Maine grappled with one of the greatest legal challenges ever before it. That challenge had its origin in a suit brought by the Penobscot and Passamaquoddy tribes against the U.S. Department of the Interior seeking the seemingly simple declaration that the department owed a fiduciary duty to the tribes based on a federal law adopted in 1790. That suit was eventually to lead to a suit by the U.S. Department of Justice against the state of Maine, and potentially 350,000 residents in the eastern two-thirds of the state, seeking return of land taken from the tribes in the latter part of the eighteenth century and first part of the nineteenth century.
    [Show full text]
  • Historical Overview
    Indian Claims Insight Historical Overview The Constitution of the U.S. authorizes the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties. The removal of Indian Nations from American lands desired by white settlers was grounded in the treaty- making process. This practice continued a policy established in colonial times, under which white European settlers sought to usurp Native American lands through a process of negotiation rather than direct conquest. The Constitution expressly prohibits the States from entering into treaties or alliances and makes no distinction between treaty making involving foreign nations and treaty making with Native Americans, although it does make a distinction between foreign nations and Indian tribes in the language empowering Congress to regulate commerce. The earliest treaties refer to “Indian Nations” or “Indian tribes.” Of all the treaties signed, most involved Native American lands, Indian removal or resettlement, or clarification of boundaries between white settlements and Indian lands. Despite the fact that treaty making process between the U.S. Government and the Indian Nations/Tribes was overwhelmingly skewed to favor U.S. territorial expansion, Indian removal, and white settlement of lands previously occupied by Native Americans, it is the grounding of the territorial expansion in the treaty-making process that provided the only hope for Native Americans to seek redress. The following timeline highlights major events impacting the history of Indian claims 1789-present. 1 Treaty signed by George Treaty Making Period 1789-1871 Washington 1817 Secret articles of the Treaty of On Dec. 2, 1817 in his annual address to Congress, President James Monroe Peace and Friendship between the provided examples of Government actions involving the purchase of Indian U.S.
    [Show full text]