Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy/Courses/Spring 2011/Federal Indian Law and Policy (Kristin Ruppel)/Federal Indian Law and Policy Literature Review

The following Federal Indian Law and Policy Law Literature Review is in support of Montana State University Course NAS 426 and NAS 530.

Sample Entry

 * Blood Struggle highlights major events and consequences in American Indian history since the Termination Act of 1953..... Wilkinson used the plight of the Nez Perce to emphasize the devastating impact of termination ....
 * Blood Struggle highlights major events and consequences in American Indian history since the Termination Act of 1953..... Wilkinson used the plight of the Nez Perce to emphasize the devastating impact of termination ....

Executive Orders (John Marian)

 * Executive Order No. 13007, 1996, “Indian Sacred Sites” [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13336, 2004, “American Indian and Alaska Native Education [GW Bush]
 * Executive Order No. 13096, 1998, “American Indian and Alaska Native Education [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13270, 2002 “Tribal College Endorsement” [GW Bush]
 * Executive Order No. 13175, 2000, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13084, 1998, “Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments” [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13158, 2000, “Marine Protected Areas” [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13021, 1996, “Tribal Colleges and Universities” [Clinton]
 * Executive Order No. 13107, 1998, “Implementation of Human Rights Treaties” [Clinton]

Non-honored Treaties (Cindy Zullo)
'Treaties Broken Unlawfully″, Saskatchewan Indian", Vol.3, No. 10, October 1972,p.7. 1972 workshop at the Cote Reserve where elderly people spoke about their loss of rights.

Natural Resources (Chris Arneson)

 * This chapter offers a wide-ranging survey of Indian environmental activists and a generalized philosophy of traditional Indian relationships with the land. The chapter then goes on to highlight the major case law and federal actions concerning Indian natural resources, categorically: explicit hunting and fishing rights, implied rights such as reserved water rights, and finally fiduciary obligations generally regarding extractive industry.  Below, highlighted issues are listed, with what I believe to be particularly salient issues in bold:
 * This chapter offers a wide-ranging survey of Indian environmental activists and a generalized philosophy of traditional Indian relationships with the land. The chapter then goes on to highlight the major case law and federal actions concerning Indian natural resources, categorically: explicit hunting and fishing rights, implied rights such as reserved water rights, and finally fiduciary obligations generally regarding extractive industry.  Below, highlighted issues are listed, with what I believe to be particularly salient issues in bold:


 * Billy Frank Jr. of the Nisqually Tribe in Washington State fought for fishing rights in a manner similar to that of the earlier Robert Satiacum of the Pallyup Tribe.
 * Ronnie Lupe, of Ndee Apaches in Arizona, lead the charge to re-establish his terminated tribe's reservation and was highly critical of the Endangered Species Act on tribal lands, but helped to bring about Secretarial Order 3206
 * Bugenig v. Hoopa Valley Tribe, 2000 (9th Cir.)—Tribe utilized Montana test (Montana v. United States,1981) to keep Reservation resident and non-Indian landowner (Roberta Bugenig) from harvesting timber on culturally valuable area within her fee-simple property. (See Federal Public Land and Resource Law, Coggins et al. pp.329 for info. on takings, reasonable expectations of property regulation.)
 * Secretarial Order 3206—Federal, agreement between tribes and federal government on Endangered Species Act enforcement.
 * CERCLA—A series of amendments that expressly provided federal environmental regulatory roles of tribes during the 1980s.
 * TAS (Treatment as States in enforcing Clean Water Act etc.)—Especially pertaining to City of Albuquerque v. Browner, 1996, which held that tribe could mandate city upstream to enact strict water quality standards, speaks to the power of CERCLA when combined with tribal sovereignty.
 * Idaho State v. Tinno, 1972 (Idaho supreme court)—Demonstrates the role of treaty interpretation in natural resource claims.
 * U.S. v. Winans, 1905—affirmed Yakima Tribe's off-reservation treaty rights pertaining to fishing.
 * State v. Towessnute, 1916 (Washington State Supreme Court)—Retorted the claims in US v. Winans, stating tribes were subject to state law
 * Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association, 1979—Upheld treaty rights, at least pertaining to hunting and fishing, as a "contract between two sovereign nations," a theory that had all-but been struck down a year earlier in the Wheeler decision.
 * Oregon DFW v. Klamath Indian Tribe, 1985—Majority of Supreme Court abdicated the cannons of treaty interpretation when deciding on the tribe's explicitly reserved fishing and hunting rights on ceded lands.
 * Winters v. U.S,1908—Established reserved water rights at time of reservation establishment.
 * Arizona v. California, 1963 Instituted the allocation of water measured by practicably irrigable acreage within Indian lands
 * Wyoming v. U.S., 1989—Prior to issuing a decision, Justice White issued a memo containing important dictum about the use of reserved water rights, basically stating that reserved water rights cannot be sold or leased, and all water not used by the tribe must remain in-stream flow.  This was, of course before state quantified water rights negotions took place, which may affect such arguments as Justice White presented.
 * U.S. v. Navajo Nation, 2003 and U.S. v. Mitchell (II) 1983—Speak to judicial review in regard to fiduciary natural resource responsibilities.


 * Pisani argues the Winters decision was "largely forgotten until 1963 when a court decided to uphold the decision" in Arizona v. California, 1963.  This "rediscovery" of reserved water rights spurred the reclaiming of reserved water rights in tribes across the US.  The article goes on to recount the history of irrigation on Indian country from the beginning of the reservation era.  The article offers vignettes of a few of the sporadic federally-funded irrigation projects throughout the allotment era.  This is also one of the few sources I have encountered that emphasizes the "make-work" nature of Indian irrigation projects, where the vocational, "civilizing" value of having Indians construct irrigaiton ditches was held as a higher priority than the actual functionality of the ditch, in the eyes of the BIA.  Article also explores the infighting over irrigation construction in Indian country between the BIA and Reclamations Service within DOI. Mentions Kansas v. Colorado, 1907 which exemplified sich infighting.  Also covers interest fees of Indian irrigation projects levied against white farmers who owned land along the projects.  This article paints a detailed portrait of irrigation debates during the allotment era.
 * Pisani argues the Winters decision was "largely forgotten until 1963 when a court decided to uphold the decision" in Arizona v. California, 1963.  This "rediscovery" of reserved water rights spurred the reclaiming of reserved water rights in tribes across the US.  The article goes on to recount the history of irrigation on Indian country from the beginning of the reservation era.  The article offers vignettes of a few of the sporadic federally-funded irrigation projects throughout the allotment era.  This is also one of the few sources I have encountered that emphasizes the "make-work" nature of Indian irrigation projects, where the vocational, "civilizing" value of having Indians construct irrigaiton ditches was held as a higher priority than the actual functionality of the ditch, in the eyes of the BIA.  Article also explores the infighting over irrigation construction in Indian country between the BIA and Reclamations Service within DOI. Mentions Kansas v. Colorado, 1907 which exemplified sich infighting.  Also covers interest fees of Indian irrigation projects levied against white farmers who owned land along the projects.  This article paints a detailed portrait of irrigation debates during the allotment era.


 * Issues addressed are:


 * Arizona v. California, 1963
 * Winters v. U.S,1908
 * Kansas v. Colorado, 1907


 * Colby makes a quick comparisson of tribal water rights quantification negotiations between other states and Arizona. She then quickly glosses over case law and issues like Winters v. U.S., 1908; Arizona v. California, 1963, "practicabily irrigable acerage" (PIA).  The author descries the need for such reserved water in Indian Country in the Southwest, as large portions of the Native population live without a potable domestic water supply.  She describes the history and bureaucratic process that led to water rights adjudication, including the McCarran Amendment, 1952, which allowed the federal fovernment to step into water rights adjudication (water rights management are rights reserved exclusively to individual states) which effectively waived sovereign tribal immunity in allowing states to negotiate directly with tribes in state courts.  The author concludes by describing the adjudication process, and listing the stipulaitons of those water rights negotiations that have already been completed in Arizona.  This is not a published or valid citation, but offers thorough, concise insight into adjudicated water rights both federally and in Arizona State.  Contact Bonnie Colby at University of Arizona for more information on this work, and whether it has been published anywhere (I was unable to find a published source.)
 * Colby makes a quick comparisson of tribal water rights quantification negotiations between other states and Arizona. She then quickly glosses over case law and issues like Winters v. U.S., 1908; Arizona v. California, 1963, "practicabily irrigable acerage" (PIA).  The author descries the need for such reserved water in Indian Country in the Southwest, as large portions of the Native population live without a potable domestic water supply.  She describes the history and bureaucratic process that led to water rights adjudication, including the McCarran Amendment, 1952, which allowed the federal fovernment to step into water rights adjudication (water rights management are rights reserved exclusively to individual states) which effectively waived sovereign tribal immunity in allowing states to negotiate directly with tribes in state courts.  The author concludes by describing the adjudication process, and listing the stipulaitons of those water rights negotiations that have already been completed in Arizona.  This is not a published or valid citation, but offers thorough, concise insight into adjudicated water rights both federally and in Arizona State.  Contact Bonnie Colby at University of Arizona for more information on this work, and whether it has been published anywhere (I was unable to find a published source.)


 * Issues addressed are:


 * Arizona v. California, 1963
 * Winters v. U.S,1908
 * "Practicabily irrigable acerage" (PIA)
 * McCarran Ammendment, 1952


 * Coggins et al. Is considered the standard casebook for federal natural resource law. The book begins with a history of American public land jurisprudence, including Johnson v. M'Intosh, 1823 (which we'll leave to the sovereignty folks.)  While not geared toward Indian natural resource law, federal natural resource law and federal Indian law tend to cross paths frequently.  This book offers excerpts from landmark cases and concise descriptions of agency function and legal context.  Below are the landmark Indian cases excerpted in Coggins et al.:
 * Coggins et al. Is considered the standard casebook for federal natural resource law. The book begins with a history of American public land jurisprudence, including Johnson v. M'Intosh, 1823 (which we'll leave to the sovereignty folks.)  While not geared toward Indian natural resource law, federal natural resource law and federal Indian law tend to cross paths frequently.  This book offers excerpts from landmark cases and concise descriptions of agency function and legal context.  Below are the landmark Indian cases excerpted in Coggins et al.:


 * Arizona v. California, 1963—Tangential to Indian issues, but plays a big role in water rights adjudication, as it held that federal reservations beyond just Indian reservations are also entitled to reserved water rights, ie. National Forests and wildlife refuges (excepts from decision.)
 * Winters v. U.S,1908—Established reserved water rights at time of reservation establishment (very brief case summary.)


 * Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 1988—Court held that the First Amendment's Free Exercise Clause did not prohibit the government from permitting timber harvest in an area traditionally used for religious purposes (Case summary fails to mention AIFRA, though it was, honestly, of no bearing on the case. Otherwise, brief case excerpts and very thorough notes section.)


 * Metcalf v. Daley, 2000 (9th Cir.)—NOAA pledged to support Makah Tribe of Washington State in petitioning the International Whaling Commission to grant the tribe a quota for harvesting gray whales (a practice the tribe voluntarily stopped in the 1920s.) A legal question arose as the the timing of NEPA actions and the validity of the agency's FONSI (the case was socially significant, but set no real precedent for general Indian law.  Excerpts from decision, dissent, and notes.)


 * Wilkins and Stark provide an introductory-level general summary of Indian culture, history, and glancing references to Indian policy and case law. While the authors at times wander into diatribes that seem to be borrowed from AIM's 20-point manifesto, the book's uniquely unacademic approach to issues lends its focus to governmental acts, policies, and statutes that have historically caused political friction, rather than those that provide significant insight into Indian jurisprudence or development of policy and statute.  As a result, Wilkins and Stark highlight cases such as Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Indian Tribe, Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico, and the Three Affiliated Tribes on the Fort Berthold Reservation class action suit against the USDA, that are either entirely excluded or only briefly referenced by the authoritative case books (Metcalf v. Daley withstanding, though the case had almost no influence on Indian jurisprudence and is often listed in case books solely for its role in delineating NEPA standards.)  Like the Colby piece listed above, sections of this work may not meet Wikipedia's verifiability standard, given its occasional blatant disregard for generally accepted science and non-neutral political positions expressed as fact.  Issues addressed in Wilkins and Stark include:
 * Wilkins and Stark provide an introductory-level general summary of Indian culture, history, and glancing references to Indian policy and case law. While the authors at times wander into diatribes that seem to be borrowed from AIM's 20-point manifesto, the book's uniquely unacademic approach to issues lends its focus to governmental acts, policies, and statutes that have historically caused political friction, rather than those that provide significant insight into Indian jurisprudence or development of policy and statute.  As a result, Wilkins and Stark highlight cases such as Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Indian Tribe, Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico, and the Three Affiliated Tribes on the Fort Berthold Reservation class action suit against the USDA, that are either entirely excluded or only briefly referenced by the authoritative case books (Metcalf v. Daley withstanding, though the case had almost no influence on Indian jurisprudence and is often listed in case books solely for its role in delineating NEPA standards.)  Like the Colby piece listed above, sections of this work may not meet Wikipedia's verifiability standard, given its occasional blatant disregard for generally accepted science and non-neutral political positions expressed as fact.  Issues addressed in Wilkins and Stark include:


 * Winters v. U.S., 1908—very simplified summary of case, and brief mention of adjudicated water rights


 * Lyng v. Northwest Cemetery Protective Association, 1988—section on Cobell uses a politically-charged quote from the case, and I could not find any further mention of the case, as it was not listed in the book's index under Lyng, NCPA, nor did it appear in any sections listed in the index under First Amendment nor AIRFA.


 * Bear Lodge Multiple Use Association v. Babbitt, 1999 (10th Cir.)—Court ruled that the plaintiffs provided no evidence that a voluntary closure of Devil's Tower in Wyoming caused injury, and therefore lacked standing. The 10th Circuit decision contains some soft dictum acknowledging the existence of numerous executive orders aimed at protecting Indian religion.


 * Metcalf v. Daley, 2000 (9th Circ.)—authors mention the case in endnotes, social concerns surrounding the issue are addressed, but there is no mention of the case's jurisprudential value.


 * Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Indian Tribe, 1982—Supreme Court held that tribes had the right to levy taxes on non-Indians doing business inside Indian reservations. Section offers one-sentence summary.


 * Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico, 1989—Supreme Court held that states and tribes held concurrent rights to taxation concerning business on Indian reservations. Section offers two-sentence summary.


 * Three Affiliated Tribes on the Fort Berthold Reservation class action suit against the USDA, 1999—Like the dozens of Indian cases during the 1960s and '70s, that claimed millions of dollars in damages for discrimination and disregarded treaty rights (and subsequently received summary judgements dismissing them—see Nisqually Tribe's $62 million lawsuit against Washington State in 1964) the Affiliated Tribes sued the USDA for $19 billion for a "22-year history of discrimination in the granting of federal loans." Section contains a paragraph summary, and no reference as to the court or current state of the case.


 * Indian Mineral Deposit Act, 1982—Congress authorized tribes to work directly with energy developers. Section offers one-sentence description.


 * Council of Energy Resource Tribes (CERT)—Interest group organized in 1973 to advance economic interests of Indian natural resource development. Section offers two-paragraph summary of organization's history.


 * Intertribal Timber Council—Established 1979 to organize timber programs on tribal lands. Section offers short description.


 * Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Service, 2007 (9th Circ.)—Court ruled that the use of treated sewage for snowmaking operations at a ski resort did not constitute a substantial burden to trigger the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, 1993. Section has brief case history.


 * Contributor Judith Royster offers a comprehensive case history of Winters v. U.S., 1908, including an in-depth description of facts, case narrative, historical consequences, and contemporary applications.
 * Contributor Judith Royster offers a comprehensive case history of Winters v. U.S., 1908, including an in-depth description of facts, case narrative, historical consequences, and contemporary applications.


 * Winters v. U.S., 1908—Thorough case summary pp. 81-107.


 * Gatches et al. offers a standard, case book for Indian law, which includes comprehensive descriptions of contemporary Indian law, general history of Indian issues from pre-contact, and offers case excerpts along with thorough notes and descriptions of legal principles.  While the book does not focus on natural resource issues, it does outline many of the major Indian natural resource cases and issues, and includes sections on mineral and timber management, water rights, and fishing and hunting rights.  Cases listed below receive substantial attention in this book, though this list does not constitute an exhaustive catalog of all natural resource cases addressed :
 * Gatches et al. offers a standard, case book for Indian law, which includes comprehensive descriptions of contemporary Indian law, general history of Indian issues from pre-contact, and offers case excerpts along with thorough notes and descriptions of legal principles.  While the book does not focus on natural resource issues, it does outline many of the major Indian natural resource cases and issues, and includes sections on mineral and timber management, water rights, and fishing and hunting rights.  Cases listed below receive substantial attention in this book, though this list does not constitute an exhaustive catalog of all natural resource cases addressed :


 * Settlement of the relationship between the White Mountain Apache Tribe and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1994—Constitutes the first substantial federal-tribal cooperation to enforce federal environmental protection standards (specifically, ESA) on tribal lands. See Executive Order 3175 & Ronnie Lupe.


 * Water, each offers case summary and notes section:
 * Winters v. U.S.
 * Arizona v. California
 * U.S. v. Adair
 * Colorado River Water Conservation District v. U.S.
 * In re General Adjudication of all Rights to use Water in the Big Horn River
 * Nevada v. U.S.
 * U.S. v. Anderson


 * Hunting & Fishing Rights, each offers case summary and notes section:
 * New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe
 * U.S. v. Winnans
 * Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association
 * Minnesota v. Mille Lachs Band of Chippewa Indians

US vs. Navajo Nation (Rochelle Lodgepole)

 * The Oyez Project, United States v. Navajo Nation, 537 U.S. 488 (2003) available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_01_1375)


 * UNITED STATES v. NAVAJO NATION - 537 U.S. 488 (2003) available at: (http://supreme.justia.com/us/537/488/)


 * UNITED STATES V. NAVAJO NATION (01-1375) 537 U.S. 488 (2003)263 F.3d 1325 available at: (http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-1375.ZS.html)


 * United States v. Navajo Nation (07-1410) available at: (http://topics.law.cornell.edu/supct/cert/07-1410)

Topics under Federal Trust Responsibilities (Diveena Marcus)
Such areas are dealing with Indian reservations, treaties, civil rights, education, health, economics, i.e. gaming and resource issues, cultural revitalization etc. Resources below will address many of these topics if read and looked into.
 * Amnesty International.The Maze of Injustice: The Failure to Protect Indigenous Women From Sexual Violence in the US. 2007. ISBN 978-0-86210-424-5
 * This report focuses on sexual violence against indigenous women in the USA. Governments have a responsibility to ensure that women are able to enjoy their right to freedom from sexual violence. As citizens of particular tribal nations, the welfare and safety of American Indian and Alaska Native women are directly linked to the authority and capacity of their nations to address such violence. I found this subject not listed on Wikipedia where this issues on violence and its facts on NA Women in Indian country are not addressed.  It also pretains to the new Indian Law and Order Act 2009.
 * Bancroft, Hubert Howe.The works of Hubert Howe Bancroft : history of Californi : vol. IV, 1840-1845. San Francisco [Calif.] : A.L. Bancroft, 1886.
 * Chronologic history of California Indians with the Federal government and policies to 1846. Though archaic I find this very important to the issues on territories of California and the subject on Rancherias/Reservations which need attention in Wikipedia.
 * Berkhofer, Robert F. Jr. Americans versus Indians: The Northwest Ordinance, Territory Making, and Native Americans. Indiana Magazine of History Vol. 84, No. 1, The Northwest Ordinance (March 1988), pp. 90-108
 * Berkhofer illustrates the history, the consequences and the U.S. territorial system. I have found that looking though Wikipedia the views and issues regarding NA are not contributed to the information posted on The Northwest Ordiance and its early treaties.
 * Briggeman, Kim. KEEPING A LANGUAGE ALIVE: Co-founder of Blackfoot immersion school in Browning visits UM. The MISSOULIAN, 2007.
 * Briggeman interviews Tribal linguist Darrell Kipp. He emphasizes the importance of the efficient use of the language to Blackfeet children and the improvements they are making in school. Any language articles written for Native American language revival and many organizational efforts in Indian country are not featured in Wikipedia.  Here is one from our own back yard.
 * Calloway, Colin G. First Peoples: A Documentary Survey of American Indian History. 2008. Third Addition. St. Martin’s.  ISBN-10: 0-312-45373-6
 * Historical Survey of Native Peoples with additional authentic documents after each chapter as well as explicit time lines framing each chapter. I find this an overall informative book on many issues and historical accounts in Native American history.  Especially the references to authentic documents.
 * Case, David. Alaska Natives & American Laws. University of Alaska Press; 2nd edition 2002. ISBN-10: 1889963089
 * This Second Edition provides expanded and up-to-date analyses of ANCSA, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, and four fields of Alaska Native law and policy: land, human services, subsistence, and self-government. The authors also trace the development of the Alaska Native organizations working to influence and change these policies.
 * Clines, Frances X. The Pequots. New York Times (1923-Current file); Feb 27, 1994; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2007) pg. SM49
 * Clines gives an over view of the Pequots and their history as well as their struggles and success in gaming and self-determination. Since they were the first Nation to implement and fight for their economic sovereignty through gaming but not much mention on Wikipedia I felt this important.
 * Dutschke, Dwight. American Indians in California: Five Views: An Ethnic Historic Site Survey for California. Nov 17 2004 http://www.cr.nps.gov/history/online_books/5views/5views1f.htm
 * Online book reviewing IRA and the Johnson O’Malley influences on ethnicities in California, page selected is focused on the Native American population in the state. Again the Johnson O'Malley Act online does not have information on the impact it had on Native Peoples and the children who had to go to public school from the reservation as well as the funding distribution for their education.
 * Egan, Timothy. Mending a Trail of Broken Treaties. New York Times (1923-Current file); Jun 25, 2000; ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2007) pg. WK3
 * Egan’s article shows maps from the Indian removal Act and the results of manifest destiny to present day. He describes the quest that all Indian nations are involved with, winning back pieces of their lands in court. I find this important regarding the onset of treaty making and the issues it presented on Native Peoples.  Treaty making is not listed on Wikipedia.
 * Emery, Steven. Native sovereigns, treaties and the constitution. Journal, Indian country today (Oneida, N.Y.) April, 2009
 * Treaties from the Delaware to present are discussed in Emery’s article and their significant impact on the status of sovereignty within Native communities today. Important for the treaty making topic.
 * Fleming, Walter C. The Complete Idiot's Guide to Native American History. by Alpha (April 1, 2003) ISBN-10: 0028644697
 * Idiot’s guide is a survey of the historical journey of Native American from prehistory to present issues and a very simple but comprehensive outline on the many issues and insights of the Native American journey.
 * Hale, Kenneth. The Green Book of Language Revitalization in Practice. Academic Press; 1 edition (2001) ISBN-10: 0123493544
 * Includes 23 case studies of language revitalization in practice, from Native American languages, Australian languages, Maori, Hawaiian, Welsh, Irish, and others, written primarily by authors directly involved in the programs. Each chapter gives a detailed overview of the various kinds of programs and methods in practice today. Strong representation in authorship and viewpoint of the people and communities whose languages are threatened, gives the readers an inside understanding of the issues involved and the community-internal attitudes toward language loss and revitalization another good topic on the support NA endangered languages and the Language act of 1990 and its amendment in 2006.
 * Heizer, Robert F. For Sale: Calfornia at 47 Cents Per Acre. (1976) Journal of California Anthropology.
 * Court sessions on determining the boundaries of Indian lands in order to determine the value to compensate the Native Americans for their territory loss. This is a good document on the Rancheria topic and its place in the termination process along with the compensation aspect regarding the Indian Claims Commission Act 1946.
 * Heizer, Robert and William C. Sturtevant.
 * Overview/survey on California tribes, their cultural backgrounds and their historical contact with Europeans and the U.S. Federal government. Heizer devoted much of his life for the rights of the CA Indians here another reference for Rancherias/reservations.
 * Herz, Richard. Legal Protection for Indigenous Cultures: Sacred Sites and Communal Rights. Virginia Law ReviewVol. 79, No. 3 (Apr., 1993), pp. 691-716
 * Legal protection scans the issues of what indigenous peoples must deal with from an international status, tribal/group as well as individual. Herz, brings up cases based on faith and compares how indigenous cases are dealt with regarding to similar situations. This reference can help with cases on sacred sites and religion and cultural preservation as well as identity
 * Kendall-MillerHeather Attorney. Katie John v. Norton. Native American Rights Fund. http://www.narf.org/cases/katiejohn.html
 * Katie John's complaint alleges that the Secretaries should have included Alaska Native allotments as public lands and further that the federal government's interest in water extends upstream and downstream from the Conservation Units established under ANILCA. The State of Alaska intervened and challenged the regulations as illegally extending federal jurisdiction to state waters. Katie John is not listed in Wikipedia who was the back bone on the Alaska v. Babbit case.
 * McGee, Robert W. Property Taxation of Indian Land After County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation. 1216 SEATTLE U. L. REV. 1437 (1993). http://lawpublications.seattleu.edu/sulr/vol16/iss3/16/
 * Despite vigorous arguments by the Yakima Nation, the United States, and the thirty-one Yakima Indian families likely to be rendered homeless by an adverse decision, the United States Supreme Court held in County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakima Nation, that states have the power to impose ad valorem taxes on reservation land owned in fee by Indians. Here is a reference for reinstatement issues and attempts and also issues on state power in Indian territory.
 * Mapes, Lynda V. Medicine Creek After 153 years, Treaty Tree lost to winter storm. 2007 Seattle Times staff reporter
 * Mapes takes the reader to the spot where Medicine Treaty was signed in Washington State and where the Original peoples ceded their lands to the United States. Recounts with elders and historians are included. This article is useful for the topics on reservations, treaties, fishing rights etc.
 * Nockels, Joan M. Katie John v. United States: Redefining Federal Public Lands in Alaska. 1996 Lewis & Clark Law School. Summer, 1996. 26 Envtl. L. 693
 * In Alaska v. Babbitt, the official case name for the Katie John v. United States dispute, the Ninth Circuit invalidated Department of Interior regulations that exempted waters in which the United States holds reserved water rights from the definition of "federal public lands" provided under the Alaska National Interests Land Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA). This topic is great for Katie John information as well as subsistence rights of Native Americans.  There is a page in Wikipedia on subsistence methods but not addressing the significant issues tied to Native Nations.
 * Pritzker, Barry M. A Native American Encyclopedia: History, Culture, and Peoples. Oxford University Press, USA 2000
 * Listed alphabetically each Native American group is presented starting with the tribal name, translation, origin, and definition. Each entry then includes facts about the group's location and population, as well as the history and culture of the group. Editor Barry Pritzker also addresses information on each group's government, economy, legal status, and reservations. Overall good reference for many topics.
 * Slagle, Allogan. Unfinished Justice: Completing the Restoration and Acknowledgement of California Indian Tribes. American Indian Quarterly, Vol 13, No 4 1989
 * Slagle gives the history of restoration for California peoples and the issues they are dealing with today.
 * Tomson, Jennifer L. NOTE:KATIE JOHN V. UNITED STATES: BALANCING ALASKAN STATE SOVEREIGNTY WITH A NATIVE GRANDMOTHER'S RIGHT TO FISH. ALASKA LAW REVIEW 2002.
 * This Note examines the meaning of “tradition” in the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (“ANILCA”) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (“MMPA”), two federal laws of particular importance in Alaska, and in Alaska state law relating to land and natural resource use. The Note draws upon a variety of sources, including the texts of those laws, judicial decisions and agency interpretative regulations. The Note argues that the term “tradition” should be defined and interpreted by paying attention to the potentially competing values associated with the term and raises the question of which institution or entity is best suited to interpret tradition in particular contexts. 26 Envtl. L. 693 (1996)
 * Uncommon controversy: Fishing rights of the Muckleshoot, Puyallup, and Nisqually Indians. A report prepared for the American Friends Service Committee. University of Washington Press (1970) ASIN: B0006D5SLM
 * The fishing wars of the Civil Rights movement in Washington State and the Puyallyp and Nisqually nations. Civil rights, sovereign territory, executive orders. The fish wars do not have their own page.
 * Wisconsin, Acts Passed at the Session of the Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Wisconsin Nabu Press 2010. ISBN-10: 114520368X
 * Northwest ordinance and the territories cede through treaty. Treaties as well as issues in Blackfeet country.

I have added other sites and legal concerns and topics This website lists many subsistence rights and issues concerning Alaska peoples. Historical links as well as court cases. November 6, 2000 http://ceq.hss.doe.gov/nepa/regs/eos/eo13175.html http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/658/310/50773/ http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=ie7&q=Executive+Order+13175&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&rlz=1I7TSNA_enUS381US381
 * Alaska Natives & Subsistence Rights. 2011 The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights/The Leadership Conference Education Fund.http://www.civilrights.org/indigenous/alaska/
 * Executive Order 13175--Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments
 * Seminole Tribe V Butterwork 1979 Seminole Tribe of Florida, an Organized Tribe of Indians, As recognized Under and by the Laws of the United States, Plaintiff-appellee, v. Robert Butterworth, the Duly Elected Sheriff of Browardcounty, Florida, Defendant-appellant - 658 F.2d 310
 * President Obama's Memorandum on Tribal Consultation

FederalCases That Changed Native Soveignty (Emerson Bull Chief)

 * Joint Tribal Council of the Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton, (1975)
 * Mashpee Tribe v. New Seabury Corp.,(1979)
 * Johnson v. McIntosh, (1823)
 * Cherokee Nation v. Georgia,(1831)
 * Worcester v. Georgia, (1832)
 * United States v. Clapox,(D.Or.1888)
 * Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe,(1978)
 * Montana v. United States,(1981)
 * Rice v. Rehner, (1983)
 * Washinton v. Confederated Tribes of the Colville Indian Reservation,(1980)
 * Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe,(1982)
 * National Farmers Union Ins. Cos. v. Crow Tribe (1985)
 * McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Comm'n,(1973)
 * New Mexico v. Mescalero Apache Tribe,(1983)
 * Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, (1978)
 * Weeks Construction, Inc. v. Oglala Sioux Housing Authority, (1986)
 * United States v. Yakima Tribal Court, (1987)
 * Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, (1903)
 * United States v. Winans, (1905)
 * Winters v. United States, (1908)
 * Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States, (1968)
 * Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passanger Fishing Vessel Association, (1978)
 * White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, (1980)
 * Arizon v. San Carlos Apache Tribe, (1983)
 * County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation, (1985)
 * Kerr-McGee Corp. v. Navajo Tribe of Indians, (1985)
 * California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, (1987)

Potential New Articles
The topics listed below are not represented in Wikipedia. They have potential for a new article.
 * Index of Federal Indian Law and Policy
 * Outline of Federal Indian Law and Policy
 * Bibliography of Federal Indian law and policy
 * Advisory Council on Historic Preservation re: Indians
 * Amendments to National HPA 1992 re: Indians
 * Executive Order 13175
 * Judge Abinanti re: Lyng v Northwest Indians
 * Yakima v Confederate Indians and Bands of the Yakima Nation
 * Katie John
 * Salinas Kansas Indian Burial Pitt also needs to be included in the Whiteford site article
 * IRA Vested Rights
 * Northwest Power Act 1980 re: Indians
 * Esther Martinez Language Preservation Act
 * Code of Regulations Section 83.7 re: Indians
 * Treaty Making re: U.S. and Indians of North America
 * Alaska v Babbit re: Katie John v Norton
 * Native American Languages Act of 1990
 * Ronnie Lupe
 * Bugenig v. Hoopa Valley Tribe, 2000 (9th Cir.)
 * Secretarial Order 3206
 * Treatment as States (TAS)
 * Idaho State v. Tinno, 1972
 * State v. Towessnute, 1916
 * Washington v. Washington State Commercial Passenger Fishing Vessel Association, 1979
 * Oregon DFW v. Klamath Indian Tribe, 1985
 * Wyoming v. U.S., 1989
 * U.S. v. Navajo Nation, 2003
 * Practicably irrigable acreage (PIA)
 * The McCarran Amendment, 43 U.S.C. § 666 (1952)
 * Lyng v. Northwest Indian Cemetery Protective Association, 1988
 * Metcalf v. Daley, 2000 (9th Cir.)
 * Bear Lodge Multiple Use Association v. Babbitt, 1999 (10th Cir.)
 * Indian Mineral Deposit Act, 1982
 * Navajo Nation v. U.S. Forest Service, 2007 (9th Circ.)
 * Nevada v. United States, 1983
 * United States v. Anderson, 1984 (7th Circ.)
 * Cotton Petroleum Corporation v. New Mexico
 * Intertribal Timber Council
 * American Indian Alaska Native Tourism Association

Existing Articles Needing Content Work
The articles listed below already exist in Wikipedia but need improvement
 * List of U.S. Supreme Court Cases involving Indian tribes
 * Tribal Law and Order Act
 * Indian Reservations
 * United States v. Washington
 * Treaty of Fort Pitt needs to account for the Delaware People's story also needs help
 * Fort Laramie and Sioux Treaty 1868 are separate pages and need to relate to each other
 * Dakota Wars do not offer enough on the intense story of the Mankato Hangings
 * Rancheria
 * Esther Martinez
 * Endangered Language Fund
 * Indian Citizen's Act 1924
 * Marias Massacre
 * Billy Frank, Jr.
 * Arizona v. California
 * Kansas v. Colorado
 * Council of Energy Resource Tribes
 * Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States
 * Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians
 * Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
 * Council of Energy Resource Tribes
 * Black Mesa Controversy