Court case
Carcieri v. Salazar
The Court held the Interior Secretary can take land into trust only for tribes that were under federal jurisdiction in 1934.
- Citation
- 555 U.S. 379 (2009)
- Court
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Year
- 2009
- Nations
- Narragansett Indian Tribe
- Treaty at issue
- none
- Effect on land rights
- eroded
What happened
The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 lets the Secretary of the Interior take land into trust for "Indians," a term the Act defines to include members of any "recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction."
The Narragansett Tribe was placed under the formal guardianship of the Colony of Rhode Island in 1709. In 1880 it agreed to relinquish its tribal authority and sell all but two acres of its remaining reservation land. In a 1978 settlement it received 1,800 acres in Charlestown, in exchange for giving up claims to state land, and agreed that the land would be subject to state law. The United States formally recognized the Tribe in 1983.
The Tribe later bought 31 more acres and planned to build housing. While litigation over local regulations was pending, the Secretary accepted the 31-acre parcel into trust. Rhode Island, its Governor and the town of Charlestown challenged that decision. The Supreme Court held that "now" in the statute means 1934, when Congress passed the Act. The Narragansett Tribe was not under federal jurisdiction then, so the Secretary lacked authority to take the parcel into trust. The Court found the statute's text unambiguous, so it did not defer to the Secretary's reading. A 2016 federal district court decision about land for the Mashpee Wampanoag noted that, as in Carcieri, the tribe was not under federal jurisdiction in 1934.
Good to know. 'Under federal jurisdiction' is a legal test the Court read as of 1934; the ruling does not say the Narragansett were not a tribe.
Summarized with AI assistance from 4 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error
What the sources say, and how this was checked
Well supported by the sources below.
the Secretary does not have the authority to take the 31-acre parcel into trust
Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)The Narragansett Tribe was placed under the Colony of Rhode Island's formal guardianship in 1709.
Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)The Tribe gained formal recognition from the Federal Government in 1983
Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)Carcieri involved a tribe that was not under federal jurisdiction at the time the IRA was enacted in 1934
Littlefield v. United States Department of the Interior, 199 F. Supp. 3d 391 (D. Mass. 2016) (Harvard Caselaw Access Project)
Research notes. 'Federal jurisdiction' is a legal term the Court read narrowly as of 1934; the opinion does not say the Narragansett were not a tribe. Later congressional or agency responses to Carcieri are not covered here.
Who is doing the work
Native legal and land defense, nationally
- Native American Rights Fund (NARF) Native-led Litigation and legal advocacy for tribal sovereignty, treaty rights, land and resources Give on their site Website
- NDN Collective (LANDBACK Campaign) Native-led LANDBACK campaign (launched 2020; Mount Rushmore closure and return of Black Hills public lands), Indigenous… Give on their site Website
- Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) Native-led Land recovery and control by tribes and individual Indian landowners Website
- Decolonizing Wealth Project (Indigenous Earth Fund; California Tribal Land Return) Native-led Reparative philanthropy Give on their site Website
Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.
Connections
Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.
Doctrine applied 3
Policy era 1
Nations named 1
- Narragansett Indian Tribesuggested
Limited 1
- Indian Reorganization Act (Wheeler-Howard Act)1934suggested
Sources
- supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/555/07-526/legal text copy
The record’s fields
- Holding
- 'Now under Federal jurisdiction' in the Indian Reorganization Act means under federal jurisdiction in 1934, so the Secretary could not take land into trust for a tribe not then under federal jurisdiction. Interior later adopted a two-part test; Congress has not enacted a legislative fix.unverified
- Kind
- Court case
- Confidence
- High
- Notes
- Some details unverified