Doctrine
indian country
Federal law defines 'Indian country' as reservations, dependent Indian communities and Indian allotments; the definition decides which government's laws apply.
- Definition
- The statutory term (18 U.S.C. 1151) for reservations, dependent Indian communities and allotments where federal and tribal jurisdiction apply.
What happened
"Indian country" is the legal term that decides where federal and tribal law, rather than state law, usually applies to Indians. The criminal code, 18 U.S.C. 1151, defines it in three parts: (a) "all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent"; (b) "all dependent Indian communities within the borders of the United States"; and (c) "all Indian allotments, the Indian titles to which have not been extinguished."
The first category can include land now owned by non-Indians, because the reservation status survives patents. That is why reservation boundary cases such as McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020) matter. There the Court held that land reserved for the Creek Nation "remains 'Indian country'" for purposes of the Major Crimes Act.
The second category is narrower. In Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government (1998), the Court held that a tribe's land was not Indian country. It said "dependent Indian communities" are a limited category of Indian lands, neither reservations nor allotments, and that they must satisfy two requirements: they must have been set aside by the Federal Government for the use of the Indians as Indian land, and they must be under federal superintendence.
The Court traced those requirements to United States v. Sandoval (1913) and later cases.
Good to know. The definition comes from the federal criminal code, which courts also use for civil questions, and the rules differ by subject.
Summarized with AI assistance from 3 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.
all land within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the United States Government, notwithstanding the issuance of any patent
18 U.S.C. 1151, Indian country defined, Cornell LIIthey must have been set aside by the Federal Government for the use of the Indians as Indian land
Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government, 522 U.S. 520 (1998), Cornell LIIland reserved for the Creek Nation since the 19th century remains “Indian country.”
McGirt v. Oklahoma, No. 18-9526 (U.S. July 9, 2020), Cornell LII
Research notes. The first sentence's gloss ('where federal and tribal law, rather than state law, usually applies') is a plain-language summary of the criminal and civil jurisdiction cases, not a quote; the rules differ by subject. The ANCSA background of the Venetie case was not read. 1151 is a criminal-code definition that courts also use for civil questions.
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
Applied in 18
- Trade and Intercourse Act of 18341834
- Standing Bear v. Crook1879
- Major Crimes Act1885
- Seymour v. Superintendent of Washington State Penitentiary1962
- Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA)1971
- Mattz v. Arnett1973
- Solem v. Bartlett1984
- Alaska v. Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government1998
- South Dakota v. Yankton Sioux Tribe1998
- City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York2005
- Carcieri v. Salazar2009
- Mashpee Wampanoag trust-land litigation (Littlefield v. Dept. of the Interior line)2016
Sources
No source is linked to this record yet. That is a gap we are working to close.
- Kind
- Doctrine
- Confidence
- Medium