South Dakota v. Bourland
Encyclopedia
South Dakota v. Bourland, 508 U.S. 679
(1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
held that Congress specifically abrogated treaty rights with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe as to hunting and fishing rights on reservation lands that were acquired for a reservoir.
, was signed between the United States
and the Sioux Indian Tribe. This reservation covered almost the entire present day state of South Dakota
, but was broken up into six separate reservations in 1889, one of which was the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation
.
In 1934, in accordance with the Indian Reorganization Act
, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe developed a tribal constitution and enacted tribal laws regulating hunting and fishing on the reservation. In 1953, Congress
passed Public Law 280
which granted South Dakota certain jurisdiction over the reservation, but reserved tribal hunting and fishing laws and regulations to tribal jurisdiction.
In 1944, Congress passed the Flood Control Act
which allowed the government to purchase land along the Missouri River
to build dams. In 1950, Congress passed the Cheyenne River Act which transferred approximately 105000 acre (424.9 km²; 164.1 sq mi) acres from the tribe for approximately $10,000,000.00. The act specifically reserved hunting and fishing rights on the land to the tribe. The tribe and South Dakota thereafter negotiated hunting and fishing agreements where the tribe would honor state hunting licenses on the reservation, until 1988 when they could not reach an agreement. The tribe then stated it would not honor state hunting licenses.
, seeking an injunction
to prevent the tribe from enforcing its regulations on non-Indian fee land and land taken under the Cheyenne River Act, but was still within the reservation boundaries. The District Court found for South Dakota and issued the injunction. The tribe then appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded in part.
The Eighth Circuit held that the tribe had the authority to regulate hunting and fishing since Congress did not explicitly revoke that authority, but that on non-Indian fee land that had been acquired by the government, the tribe's authority had been divested unless certain exceptions were met, to be determined by further action in the District Court. South Dakota appealed and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari
.
delivered the opinion of the court. Thomas first went through the Cheyenne River Act and covered what each relevant section stated. Thomas noted that there was a difference between the 104420 acre (422.6 km²; 163.2 sq mi) of trust land transferred by the tribe under the Cheyenne River Act and the 18000 acre (72.8 km²; 28.1 sq mi) of non-Indian owned fee lands transferred under the Flood Control Act. Citing Menominee Tribe v. United States
, and Montana v. United States
, , Thomas noted that Congress has the power to abrogate treaty provisions but that they must "clearly express its intent to do so." Although Thomas indicated that such an abrogation be clearly expressed, he found that the statutes in question "implies the loss of regulatory jurisdiction" by the tribe. Although Thomas found that the statute implied the loss rather than clearly stated it, he reversed the opinion of the Eighth Circuit Court.
issued a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Souter
. Blackmun went into detail pointing out the difference between an explicit abrogation and an implied abrogation. Blackmun would have upheld the decision of the Court of Appeals.
Case citation
Case citation is the system used in many countries to identify the decisions in past court cases, either in special series of books called reporters or law reports, or in a 'neutral' form which will identify a decision wherever it was reported...
(1993), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases...
held that Congress specifically abrogated treaty rights with the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe as to hunting and fishing rights on reservation lands that were acquired for a reservoir.
History
In 1868, the Fort Laramie TreatyTreaty of Fort Laramie (1868)
The Treaty of Fort Laramie was an agreement between the United States and the Oglala, Miniconjou, and Brulé bands of Lakota people, Yanktonai Dakota, and Arapaho Nation signed in 1868 at Fort Laramie in the Wyoming Territory, guaranteeing to the Lakota ownership of the Black Hills, and further...
, was signed between the United States
United States
The United States of America is a federal constitutional republic comprising fifty states and a federal district...
and the Sioux Indian Tribe. This reservation covered almost the entire present day state of South Dakota
South Dakota
South Dakota is a state located in the Midwestern region of the United States. It is named after the Lakota and Dakota Sioux American Indian tribes. Once a part of Dakota Territory, South Dakota became a state on November 2, 1889. The state has an area of and an estimated population of just over...
, but was broken up into six separate reservations in 1889, one of which was the Cheyenne River Indian Reservation
Cheyenne River Indian Reservation
The Cheyenne River Indian Reservation was created by the United States in 1889 by breaking up the Great Sioux Reservation, following its victory over the Lakota in a series of wars in the 1870s. The reservation covers almost all of Dewey and Ziebach counties in South Dakota...
.
In 1934, in accordance with the Indian Reorganization Act
Indian Reorganization Act
The Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934 the Indian New Deal, was U.S. federal legislation that secured certain rights to Native Americans, including Alaska Natives...
, the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe developed a tribal constitution and enacted tribal laws regulating hunting and fishing on the reservation. In 1953, Congress
United States Congress
The United States Congress is the bicameral legislature of the federal government of the United States, consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Congress meets in the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C....
passed Public Law 280
Public Law 280
Public Law 280 is a federal law of the United States establishing "a method whereby States may assume jurisdiction over reservation Indians," as stated by Arizona Supreme Court Justice Stanley G. Feldman. Public Law 280 is a federal law of the United States establishing "a method whereby States...
which granted South Dakota certain jurisdiction over the reservation, but reserved tribal hunting and fishing laws and regulations to tribal jurisdiction.
In 1944, Congress passed the Flood Control Act
Flood Control Act
There are multiple laws known as the Flood Control Act. Typically, they are administered by the United States Army Corps of Engineers:-List of Flood Control Acts:*Flood Control Act of 1917...
which allowed the government to purchase land along the Missouri River
Missouri River
The Missouri River flows through the central United States, and is a tributary of the Mississippi River. It is the longest river in North America and drains the third largest area, though only the thirteenth largest by discharge. The Missouri's watershed encompasses most of the American Great...
to build dams. In 1950, Congress passed the Cheyenne River Act which transferred approximately 105000 acre (424.9 km²; 164.1 sq mi) acres from the tribe for approximately $10,000,000.00. The act specifically reserved hunting and fishing rights on the land to the tribe. The tribe and South Dakota thereafter negotiated hunting and fishing agreements where the tribe would honor state hunting licenses on the reservation, until 1988 when they could not reach an agreement. The tribe then stated it would not honor state hunting licenses.
Lower Courts
South Dakota then filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of South DakotaUnited States District Court for the District of South Dakota
The United States District Court for the District of South Dakota is the United States District Court or the Federal district court, whose jurisdiction for issues pertaining to federal law or diversity for the state of South Dakota. The court is based in Sioux Falls with other courthouses in...
, seeking an injunction
Injunction
An injunction is an equitable remedy in the form of a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing certain acts. A party that fails to comply with an injunction faces criminal or civil penalties and may have to pay damages or accept sanctions...
to prevent the tribe from enforcing its regulations on non-Indian fee land and land taken under the Cheyenne River Act, but was still within the reservation boundaries. The District Court found for South Dakota and issued the injunction. The tribe then appealed to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:* Eastern District of Arkansas* Western District of Arkansas...
. The Court of Appeals affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded in part.
The Eighth Circuit held that the tribe had the authority to regulate hunting and fishing since Congress did not explicitly revoke that authority, but that on non-Indian fee land that had been acquired by the government, the tribe's authority had been divested unless certain exceptions were met, to be determined by further action in the District Court. South Dakota appealed and the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari
Certiorari
Certiorari is a type of writ seeking judicial review, recognized in U.S., Roman, English, Philippine, and other law. Certiorari is the present passive infinitive of the Latin certiorare...
.
Opinion of the Court
Reversed. Justice Clarence ThomasClarence Thomas
Clarence Thomas is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Succeeding Thurgood Marshall, Thomas is the second African American to serve on the Court....
delivered the opinion of the court. Thomas first went through the Cheyenne River Act and covered what each relevant section stated. Thomas noted that there was a difference between the 104420 acre (422.6 km²; 163.2 sq mi) of trust land transferred by the tribe under the Cheyenne River Act and the 18000 acre (72.8 km²; 28.1 sq mi) of non-Indian owned fee lands transferred under the Flood Control Act. Citing Menominee Tribe v. United States
Menominee Tribe v. United States
Menominee Tribe v. United States, 391 U.S. 404 , was a case in which the Supreme Court ruled that the tribal hunting and fishing rights which were retained by treaty were not abrogated by the Menominee Termination Act without a clear and unequivocal statement to that effect by Congress...
, and Montana v. United States
Montana v. United States
Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 is a Supreme Court case which addressed the Crow Nation’s ability to regulate hunting and fishing on tribal lands by a non-tribal member. The case considered several important issues concerning tribes' treaty rights and sovereign governing authority on Indian...
, , Thomas noted that Congress has the power to abrogate treaty provisions but that they must "clearly express its intent to do so." Although Thomas indicated that such an abrogation be clearly expressed, he found that the statutes in question "implies the loss of regulatory jurisdiction" by the tribe. Although Thomas found that the statute implied the loss rather than clearly stated it, he reversed the opinion of the Eighth Circuit Court.
Dissent
Justice Harry BlackmunHarry Blackmun
Harold Andrew Blackmun was an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1970 until 1994. He is best known as the author of Roe v. Wade.- Early years and professional career :...
issued a dissenting opinion, joined by Justice Souter
David Souter
David Hackett Souter is a former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. He served from 1990 until his retirement on June 29, 2009. Appointed by President George H. W. Bush to fill the seat vacated by William J...
. Blackmun went into detail pointing out the difference between an explicit abrogation and an implied abrogation. Blackmun would have upheld the decision of the Court of Appeals.
External links
- South Dakota v. Gregg Bourland, et al.,