Books:
Cambridge History of the Native Peoples of the Americas. New York: Cambridge University Press,
1996-2000 3 Vols. (North America Volume 1, 2 Parts)
This work discusses Indian concerns in both Canada and the United States. It addresses the
Potlatch Act of 1885 and the Dawes Act of 1887 and the Indian’s concern about losing their
autonomy if made citizens. Canadian Indians were particularly vocal in their dissent of the citi
zenship laws. There are also several references to the Termination Acts of the 1950s in the
U.S. and the consequences of the movement of Indians to urban settings and the formation of a
small but significant middle class which produced several tribal leaders.
Carlson, David J. Sovereign Selves: American Indian Autobiography and the Law. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 2006.
Indian Citizenship
An intellectual review of Indian Law by significant Indians through their autobiographies. Two
chapters are about Charles Eastman, a Native American doctor, who wrote in the late 1800s
and early 1900s. They address his views on allotment and civil rights. It discusses at length the
creation of citizenship law and its paternalistic notions of the failed attempt to assimilate Indians.
Cohen, Felix S. Felix S. Cohen’s Handbook of Federal Indian Law. Albuquerque, NM: University of New
Mexico Press, 1971.
This book contains sections on United States power over Indians as guardians of their land, di
versity of citizenship and the ability to sue when effected by events outside the reservation, the
effect of Indian citizenship on various aspects of the rights of government to interact with Indi
ans, such as taxation and the right to vote, various Indian groups including noncitizen Indians,
Alaskan natives, the Five Civilized Tribes and half breeds, civil liberties due citizens, the Dawes
Act, and many other legal issues concerning American Indians.
-----. Indians are citizens. Washington, DC: Department of the Interior, U.S. Indian Service, 1948.
A pamphlet, printed at the Chilocco Indian Agricultural School in Chilocco, OK as part of a free
series of pamphlets for general distribution explaining the status of Indians. This discusses why
twenty years after Congress granted Indians citizenship after citizenship many well-meaning
people still think Indians are not citizens. It presents their current status so as to counter ignorance and prejudice.
Deloria, Vine Jr., ed. American Indian Policy in the Twentieth Century. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1985.
Chapter one is a concise overview of Indian policy leading up to the granting of citizenship and
then through Indian involvement in the civil rights movements of the 1960 in order to gain the
rights of citizenship. Chapter five addresses Indian voting by discussing how Indians use this
right of citizenship, when they were denied the vote, and Indian voter turn-out and its impact.
Books Continued...
Deloria, Vine Jr., and Raymond J. DeMallie, eds. Documents of American Indian Diplomacy: Treaties,
Agreements, and Conventions, 1775-1979. 2 vols. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1999.
This is a collection of treaties largely proposed and often rejected by the United States. These
primary documents reflect American attitudes towards the Indian and trace the history of rela
tions with each tribe. Included are such relevant treaties as the 1861 Treaty with the Pottawato
mies allowing the male head of a household to be a citizen if the President of the United States
thought that person to be intelligent and prudent in their affairs.
Deloria, Vine Jr., and David E. Wilkins. Tribes, Treaties and Constitutional Tribulations. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, 1999.
Indian Citizenship
The book is concerned with the application of the U.S. constitution as it applies to American In
dians, especially the ways in which the Indian peoples are often excluded from the protections
offered by the constitution. It focuses on the 1870 Senate Judiciary Committee discussion of
the rights of Indians in light of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments. By 1924 citizenship
had been granted by the amendments, but without due-process and equal protection rights.
Getches, David H., Charles F. Wilkinson, and Robert A. Williams, Jr. Cases and Materials on Federal
Indian Law. 5th ed. St. Paul, MN: West Group, 2005.
This text discusses significant federal court cases with a focus on United States supreme court
cases concerning American Indians since 1789. It addresses removal treaties, allotments and
assimilation, reorganization, the Termination Period, and the Era of Self-determination. The
book shows the legal precedents and changing trends over time, such as decisions that inter
pret the 14th Amendment in McKay v. Campbell, 16 F. Cas 161 (1871); the Indian not being
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94 (1884); concerns
that the Allotment Act of 1887 may have been a hasty attempt at grating citizenship as refer
enced in United States v. Celestine, 215 U.S. 278, 291 (1909) and other cases up to the pre
sent. Currently, although early decisions are not being abandoned, the courts are granting more
exceptions which protect non-Indian rights and property and undermine tribal sovereignty.
Hoxie, Frederick E. A Final Promise: The Campaign to Assimilate the Indians, 1880-1920. Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press, 1984.
This is political history from a white point of view. Politicians and reformers wanted Indians to
be part of American society. To achieve this, they believed the Indian must be assimilated, and
this meant citizenship. When the Indians resisted a more pessimistic approach controlled by the
rising political power of Western politicians governed federal policy. This put the Indian in a
status of minority citizen which produced racial distrust. The work describes the sources and
effects of attempted assimilation and looks at the process of reexamination of guardianship in
Indian policy through the 1920s.
Books Continued…
Priest, Loring Denson. Uncle Sam’s Stepchildren: The Reformation of the United States Indian Policy,
1865-1887. Nebraska, NE: University of Nebraska Press. 1975.
Analyzes the agitation which led to changes in Indian policy between the end of the Civil War in
1865 and the passage of the Dawes Act of February, 1887. Priest looks at the relationship be
tween Indian and Black problems as well as the legislative history of severalty plans. Blacks
had more to gain as they had practically no rights. Indians were independent by status. Re
formers saw the failure of the Black to assume citizenship once granted due to lack of education
and hoped to avoid the same problem with the Indian. The book then extensively covers the
recommendation for a comprehensive law, a discussion of the problems created by Indian citi
zenship for whites, opposition to and advocacy of immediate citizenship, and the issues of
“wardship.” The aftermath of the Act is also covered.
Prucha, Francis Paul. A Bibliographical Guide to the History of Indian-White Relations in the United
States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
Indian Citizenship
A bibliographic index of many topics concerning American Indians.
-------. The Great Father: The United States Government and the American Indian. 2 vols. Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press, 1984.
Discusses citizenship from before the Fourteenth Amendment to the Dawes Act. Other
references are made to plans for education leading to Indians wanting citizenship as the highest
privilege that could be conferred upon them, ongoing policies after citizenship was granted and
the various incidents when citizenship was enacted for specific groups.
Prucha, Francis Paul (ed). Americanizing the American Indians: Writing by the “Friends of the Indian”
1880-1900. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1973.
The Friends were resolved to Americanize the Indian, thereby removing the “problem,” regard
less of what the Indian wanted for themselves. This would be achieved by creating government
policies that broke up the tribes and their lands, gave all Indians immediate citizenship, and edu
cated the Indian on how to be a “good American.” This work presents representative literature
from the Friends, including their views on citizenship.
------- and D. S. Otis. The Dawes Act and the Allotment of Indian Lands. Norman, OK: University of
Oklahoma Press, 1973.
This is a thorough discussion of the allotment concept as evidenced in the Dawes Act of 1887
and its effect upon Indians up to 1900. Although the acts taken by all levels of the U.S. govern
ment appear to be a mistake to many observers, the author thinks they were made in good faith
and were sincere efforts to defend and help the Indian. The government had to balance Indian
interests with the economic interests of an expanding American population. This work shows
both sides of the issue.
Books Continued…
Washburn, Wilcomb E. The Assault on Indian Tribalism: The General Allotment Law (Dawes Act) of
1887. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippencott Company, 1975.
Indian Citizenship
Considers the decisions made around the Dawes Act and the possible alternatives to that deci
sion. It looks at the people involved in the decision and their context to the creation of the Act,
particularly the reformers who in their desire to do give equality to the Indian were blind to the
fact that many Indians did not consider citizenship a step forward. It provides documents show
ing the sources available, and looks at public attitudes that affected the decisions made.
Articles:
Abbott, Austin, “Indians and the Law.” Harvard Law Review 2, no. 4 (Nov. 1888): 167- 179.
The article deals with first contact to 1829 on the basis of international law, such that the Indians
had a right of occupancy but no legal status as citizens; then 1829 to 1871 which was a period
of compulsory emigration under the form of consent by voluntary treaty, but which made the In
dian dependent upon the United States; then 1871 to 1887 as a period of confinement of Indi
ans to reservations by executive control. In 1871 the policy of making treaties with the Indian
was removed and in 1886 the U.S. created a civil code of law for the Indians. From 1887 with
the Dawes Act, the U.S. assumes legislative and judicial power over Indians and the allotment
of land to individuals rather then the tribe, with the pending burden of citizenship upon the pass
ing of a period of time after acceptance by the individual Indian of this allotted land.
Indian Citizenship
Canfield, George F. “The Legal Position of the Indian.” American Law Review 15, no.1 (January 1881):
21-37.
This considers the legal relations of the Indian to the U.S. government, which had not changed
in the prior fifty years (1831-1881). The author discusses the idea of citizenship and the mean
ing of being a “person” under the U.S. Constitution. He rejects citizenship as an option as the
Indian is not ready to vote intelligently, but they should receive protections due a person. He
considers Indians to be part of tribes which are sovereign nations who were “roaming around
our country.”
Clow, Richmond L. “A Hesitant Second.” American Indian Quarterly 15, no.1 (Winter, 1991): 39-43.
The history of the individual Indian is often overlooked in favor of larger policy issues. The Gen
eral Allotment Act of 1887 offered Indians citizenship though application remained limited.Many
other acts granted citizenship, but the right to title of the property was continually held in
trust. By 1906 the push to grant citizenship was slowed by Congress and upheld by the courts.
In 1912 the Commission of Indian Affairs sent a survey to reservations asking for the results of
citizenship. The result was that white officials resented having Indians vote when they paid no
taxes. This led to the proposition in 1929 of tribal self rule. The article is a critique of Russell L.
Barsh’s essay on self rule.
Cohen, Felix S. “Indian Rights and the Federal Courts.” Minnesota Law Review 14 no. 2 (January,
1940): 145-200.
This article considers the rights of Indians specially granted to them by American Law outside of
their rights as U.S. citizens: the right of self-government, the civil liberties of Indians, and the
property rights of Indians. They have an obligation to their tribe as full participating members of
a separate governmental structure of their own creation. Indians may protect their rights as
United States citizens by either giving up their citizenship in an oppressing tribe, or attack the
discrimination itself. The property rights of an Indian are those of the tribe and those of the indi
vidual.
Articles Continued…
Franco, Jere’. “Empowering the World War II Native American”: Postwar Civil Rights.” Wicazo Sa Review 9, no. 1. (Spring, 1993): 32-37.
The Snyder Act of 1924, which granted citizenship to all Indians, was not a reward for service in
WWI as some claim, but a movement by Progressives on the Senate Committee on Indian Af
fairs to limit the power of the Department of the Interior so that the Department would finally dis
pense with the reservation system. The Nationality Act of 1940 emphasizes the citizenship of
Indians to remind them of their duty to perform military service. However, by WWII six states still
denied Indians the right to vote. The article discussed the reasons for this and the decisions to
reverse these statutes.
Indian Citizenship
Haas, Theodore H. “The Legal Aspects of Indian Affairs from 1887 to 1957.” Annals of the American
Academy of Political and Social Science 311 American Indians and American Life (May, 1957): 12-22.
This article discusses the General Allotment Act of 1887 and the Citizenship Act of 1924 and the
effects of both. The Allotment Act imposed a uniform legal principal upon all Indians, the allot
ment of land to each Indian so it may be farmed, whereas prior to this considerations were
made for individual tribes. Citizenship was granted but several states would not allow suf
frage. Discriminatory laws were repealed and state laws could be superseded by Federal law
when the Indian was off the reservation. Social science principals were applied to the Indian
Reorganization Act under FDR.
Houghton, N. D. “The Legal Status of Indian Suffrage in the U.S.” California Law Review 19, no. 5 (July
1931): 507-520.
Arizona’s refusal to allow Indians to vote because they were “persons under guardianship” of
the United States is the focus of this article. Suffrage is the privilege granted by the states and
there was a concern of suddenly adding large blocks of potentially voters into the system, as
they could cause radical change to occur. This ban was lifted in 1948 by the Arizona legislature.
Maltz, Earl M. “The Fourteenth Amendment and Native American Citizenship.” Constitutional Commentary 17 no. 3 (Winter 2000): 555 – 574.
This presentation considers the impact of the status of Native Americans on the wording of the
Fourteenth Amendment and the Civil Rights Act of 1866. Prior treaties conflicted with the intent
of the 1857 Dred Scott decision, in which Chief Justice Roger Brooke Taney concluded that
Congress lacked authority to naturalize Blacks born in the United Sates. This made the status
of Native Americans unclear. There was opposition to providing the vote granted by citizenship
to Native Americans as well as to Blacks. This work looks at the opinions of legal theorists that
influenced the wording that would satisfy most of the interested parties.
Martin, Jill E. “’Neither Fish, Fowl nor Good Red Herring’: The Citizenship Status of American Indians,
1830-1924.” Journal of the West 29 no. 3 (1990): 75-87.
Martin focuses on the citizenship status of American Indians during the formation of the United
States as a sovereign state; Indian rights to the use of land at the beginning of European settle
ment; Treatment of Indians as a foreign government with the tribal members determined as for
eigners; Ratification of the 1887 General Allotment Act providing land; and citizen status to indi
vidual Indians.
Articles Continued…
Owl, Frell M. “Who and What is an American Indian?” EthnoHistory 9 no. 3 (Summer, 1962): 265-284.
Cherokee tribal member Frell Owl describes various terms applied to Indians as they are not
clearly defined in U.S. law. Definitions are important when it comes to assigning benefits by the
states, many of which were reluctant to deal with the Indian in any capacity. The article dis
cusses the attitudes of Indians toward their status, be it perceived as a ward of the U.S., or as a
citizen.
Peterson, Helen L. “American Indian Political Participation.” Annals of the American Academy of Political
and Social Science Vol. 311, American Indians and American Life. (May, 1957): 116-126.
Indian Citizenship
This reviews the dual nature of Indian citizenship and obligations to both their tribe and the
U.S. Since the 1950s there has been a movement by U.S. officials to reduce Indian depend
ence on the U.S. government, but the systems in place prohibit full participation by Indi
ans. However, Indian participation in the U.S. political system is strong, as evidenced by exer
cising the vote and performing military service.
Rollings, Willard Hughes. “Citizenship and Suffrage: The Native American Struggle for Civil Rights in the
American West, 1830-1965.” Nevada Law Journal (Fall 2004): 126-140.
Rollings provides a thorough overview of the history of Indian U.S. citizenship with a focus on
the rights of citizenship and suffrage. He looks at the effect of the 1830 Removal Act and the
1870 and 1880 court cases which continued to deprive Indians of citizenship rights in the
West. “The Friends of the Indian” sought to fully assimilate them by making the Indian individual
farmers. The Dawes Act, which brought U.S. citizenship to thousands of Indians in exchange
for their land, was slowed down by the Burke Act of 1906. By 1924, the Citizenship Act granted
citizenship to any remaining individuals. Some states however, denied Indians voting rights and
Western courts backed these decisions. Several of the cases are listed in the article. It was not
until 1958 that the last state, New Mexico, allowed the vote, but this was challenged in 1962. It
was not until the 1965 Voting Rights Act that the Indian right to vote appears to be secure.
“Status of Indians before State and Federal Courts.” Columbia Law Review, 14, no.7 (Nov. 1914): 587590.
Examines the chaotic status of Indain citizenship in 1914 as the Indians were considered wards
of the nation, did not hold their land in fee simple, and there was no common treaty system for
all the tribes. There were different rules governing the Indian when they were on the reservation
then when they were off the reservation. Knowing which rules applied was part of the problem;
the controlling law could be that of a U.S. citizen, federal treaties or laws dealing with a sover
eign nation, or those of the states.
Svingen, Orlan J. “Jim Crow, Indian Style.” American Indian Quarterly 11, no. 4 (Autumn, 1987): 275286.
Reviews the June 13, 1986 United States District Court case, Windy Boy v. Big-Horn County
which ruled that there were official acts of discrimination against Indians who wanted to vote in
Montana.
Articles Continued…
Wilkins, David E. “African-Americans and Aboriginal Peoples: Similarities and Differences in Historical
Experiences.” Cornell Law Review 90, no. 2 (January, 2005): 515-530.
Compares and contrasts the rights of African-Americans with Indians from colonization through
2003. Political freedom and ongoing racial and ethnic prejudice are considered. There are sev
eral similarities between the two experiences, such as being denied the vote and the attempt to
assimilate both groups on a second-class status. The major differences lie in the foreign nation
status of the Native America Indian. There is a discussion of how several court cases point out
“specific instances of disparate treatment” between whites and these two marginalized groups.
Indian Citizenship
Williams, David C. “The Borders of the Equal Protection Clause: Indians as People.” UCLA Law Review
38, no. 4 (April, 1991): 759-870
This article considers the U.S. laws that discriminate in favor of Native American Indians. It ar
gues that although the Equal Protection Clause applies to all citizens, those Indians on reserve
tions are still considered part of a sovereign nation under the Fourteenth Amendment. This is a
cause for concern as the Amendment is supposed to protect racial groups, but it separates Indi
ans from this category – when it is convenient to do so.
Dissertations:
Furnish, Patricia Lee. "'Aboriginally yours' The Society of American Indians and the United States Citizenship, 1890-1924." PhD diss., The University of Oklahoma, 2005.
Indian Citizenship
Charles Eastman, a Native American doctor, created the Society of American Indians in 1910 to
help the bring Indians together in a political organization with the ultimate goal of assimilation
into American society. The organization failed in large part because of the various philosophies
on the subject from both Indians and Progressive Era reformers.
Government Statues:
Civil Rights Act of 1886, U.S. Statutes at Large 14 (April 9, 1866): 27.
It made all people “. . .born in the United States and not subject to a foreign power, excluding Indians not
taxed,. . .” citizens.
General Allotment (Dawes) Act, U.S. Statutes at Large 24 (February 8, 1887): 388-91.
Allocation of usable land on reservations to individual Indians. Some tribes were excluded.
U.S. Statutes at Large 25 (August 9, 1888): 392.
Provided that an Indian woman would become an American citizen by marrying an existing, white, male
citizen.
U.S. Statutes at Large 31 (May 3, 1901): 1447.
Declared all Indians in the Indian Territory citizens of the United States.
Indian Citizenship
Burke Act, Public Law 149, U.S. Statutes at Large 34 (May 8, 1906): 182-83.
Enacted to keep Indians from losing allocated land under the Dawes Act. Future allotments would be
held in trust for up to twenty-five years until the Indian could be educated as to how to be a good citizen.
Public Law 75, U.S. Statutes at Large 41 (November 6, 1919): 350.
Any Indian who received an honorable discharge from military service during WWI could apply for citizenship and be granted it without affecting rights to tribal property.
Indian Citizenship Act, Public Law 175, U.S. Statutes at Large 43. (June 2, 1924): 253.
All Indians born in the U.S. are made citizens provided it does not impair their right to tribal property.
Nationality Act of 1940, Public Law 853, U.S. Statutes at Large 54 (October 14, 1940): 1137-74.
Provides a comprehensive nationality code, which included minority groups such as Indians.
1965 Voting Rights Act, Public Law 89-110, U.S. Statutes at Large 79 (August 6, 1965): 435-46.
Provided clarification that all United States citizens could vote, including Indians who had dual citizenship with their tribe.
Indian Rights Act of 1968, Public Law 90-284, U.S. Statutes at Large 82 (April 11, 1968): 77-81.
Prescribes penalties for acts of violence or intimidation against any peoples, details the rights of Indians
exercising self government, and gives jurisdiction to states over Indians when not on a reservation.
Compiled and Annotated by: Thomas Walsh, Dec. 2007
Web Update: Monday, January 28, 2008 2:31 PM