Court case
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation
The Court allowed the Power Authority to take Tuscarora land bought in fee for a reservoir, with just compensation.
- Citation
- 362 U.S. 99 (1960)
- Court
- U.S. Supreme Court
- Year
- 1960
- Nations
- Tuscarora Nation (Haudenosaunee)
- Treaty at issue
- none for the fee lands at issue (purchased in fee)
- Effect on land rights
- eroded
What happened
The Tuscarora Indian Nation owned land in fee simple near the Niagara River at Lewiston, New York. The opinion traces how: the Tuscaroras, with help from Presidents Washington and Jefferson and Congress, sold their North Carolina lands through the Secretary of War for $15,000. That money bought additional land next to tracts the Nation had received earlier. In 1804 the Nation bought 4,329 acres from the Holland Land Company, with the assistance of Secretary of War Henry Dearborn, and the Nation has owned those lands since the conveyance of January 2, 1809.
In 1957 Congress, by Public Law 85-159, directed the Federal Power Commission to license the Power Authority of the State of New York to build a hydroelectric project. The project's storage reservoir would take part of those Tuscarora lands. The Nation argued that the land lay within a federal "reservation," that a treaty protected it, and that 25 U.S.C. section 177, which forbids transfers of Indian land except by treaty or convention, barred the taking.
The Supreme Court disagreed on each point. Because the Nation owned the land in fee simple and no interest in it was owned by the United States, it was not within a "reservation" under the Federal Power Act. By the Act's broad terms, the Commission's licensees may take "lands owned by Indians, as well as those of all other citizens," on payment of just compensation. The lands were not subject to any treaty with the United States, and section 177 does not apply to the United States itself or its licensees. Justice Black dissented, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Douglas.
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 lands in question are not subject to any treaty between the United States and the Tuscarora Indian Nation
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99 (1960) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)lands owned by Indians, as well as those of all other citizens, when needed for a licensed project
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99 (1960) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)the Tuscaroras were able, through the Secretary of War, to sell their vast North Carolina lands for $15,000
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99 (1960) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)Decided March 7, 1960
Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, 362 U.S. 99 (1960) (U.S. Reports, Library of Congress)
Research notes. The old text's 'bought with its own funds' is replaced by the opinion's account that the purchase money came from the sale of the Nation's North Carolina lands, held in trust by the Secretary of War. The 'leading example' and 'later cases' sentence was removed as unsourced. I read the syllabus and the statement of facts and holdings, not every section.
Who is doing the work
Working with these nations
- Oneida Indian Nation Nation government About 18,000 acres in trust (2022 est.), 25,000-acre cap under 2013 agreement
- Rematriation Native-led Indigenous women-led media, education, community advocacy Give on their site Website
- The Nature Conservancy (TNC) Allied land trust Funder/partner in several tribal land returns Website
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
Nations named 2
- Haudenosaunee (Six Nations)suggested
- Tuscarora Nationsuggested
Policy era 1
- Termination1953suggested
Decided a dispute over 1
- Tuscarora and the Niagara Power Project (1960)1958suggested
Sources
- supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/362/99/legal text copy
The record’s fields
- Holding
- Tuscarora lands owned in fee simple are not a 'reservation' under the Federal Power Act, so a licensee may condemn them for a power project (Niagara) on paying compensation; 25 U.S.C. 177 did not bar the taking. Black, Warren and Douglas dissented.
- Kind
- Court case
- Confidence
- High