Sovereigns and citizens? The contested status of American Indian tribal nations and their members

Abstract

American Indian tribal members are citizens of both tribal nations and the larger national body. Tribal nations' contemporary resurgence has made tribal citizenship politically visible, materially significant, and politically contested. Conflicts about tribal members' status are not merely racial or ethnic in character, but reflect fundamental tensions between settler societies and indigenous survivors who challenge national narratives and demand collective rights. Tribal members' dual citizenships and the conflict about them are the result of discordant federal policy legacies, tenacious tribal survival, and the erosion of racial barriers to citizenship. Differences between ethnonational tribal citizenship and republican-based US citizenship fuel public criticism in the context of widespread ignorance about treaties and tribal rights. Crucially, while legal and political dimensions of citizenship have been partly extended to tribal members, they remain excluded from the national identity.

Keywords:

• citizenship
• legal status
• racism
• political sociology
• rights
• unmaking citizenship

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank James Fenelon, Kevin Bruyneel, Dan Segal, Stuart McConnell, Sharon Snowiss, Debra Minkoff, and the anonymous reviewers for feedback about previous versions of this article.

Notes

1. In addition to the specific citations listed in the text, more in-depth information about federal Indian policy and federal Indian law can be found in Wilkins (1997, 2002), Wilkins and Lomawaima (2001), Wilkinson (1987), Cornell (1988) and Deloria and Lytle (1984).

2. Tee-Hit-Ton Indians vs. United States, 348 US 272, 289-90 (1955).

3. Historically, most Indian nations also incorporated individuals who are not linked in one of these two ways. This is uncommon today.

4. United States vs. Washington, 384 F Supp. 312 (1974).