Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights

Violation

Termination policy: House Concurrent Resolution 108 (1953) and Public Law 280

Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.

In 1953 Congress adopted House Concurrent Resolution 108, calling for an end to federal ties with tribes, and Public Law 280, extending state jurisdiction.

Treaty
Treaties and trust relationships of the named tribes (e.g., Klamath 1864, Menominee 1854)
When
1953-1970
Land affected
Federal recognition and trust status; reservation land; treaty-based services.
Acreage
over 3 million acres (National Archives)

What happened

Many tribes had treaties or agreements creating a lasting relationship with the United States, including trust protection of their land. House Concurrent Resolution 108, adopted August 1, 1953, declared that Congress wanted to end that relationship. According to the National Archives, it called for termination "at the earliest possible time" for all tribes in California, Florida, New York and Texas, and it named specific tribes: the Flathead Tribe of Montana, the Klamath Tribe of Oregon, the Menominee Tribe of Wisconsin, the Potawatomi Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska, and members of the Chippewa Tribe on the Turtle Mountain Reservation.

Public Law 280, enacted August 15, 1953, "conferred jurisdiction over criminal offenses and civil cases arising on most Indian reservations" to state governments in California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon and Wisconsin. The Archives states that "from 1953 until 1970, Congress initiated 60 separate termination proceedings against American Indian tribes" and that "over three million acres of tribal lands were relinquished as a result." The Nixon administration repudiated termination in 1970.

A Carleton College course page says the National Congress of American Indians knew the policies would "destroy tribal governments." The Archives figure of 60 refers to termination proceedings; it is not a count of tribes. This is about federal policy, not a court finding. The Menominee Restoration Act of 1973 (see the Menominee record) is one example of Congress later undoing a termination.

Good to know. The figure of 60 counts termination proceedings, not tribes; other counts put the number of tribes and bands terminated at about 109.

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.

  1. Congress initiated 60 separate termination proceedings against American Indian tribesTermination (National Archives, Native American Heritage)
  2. called for termination “at the earliest possible time” of all American Indian tribes in California, Florida, New York, and TexasTermination (National Archives, Native American Heritage)
  3. They knew the policies would “destroy tribal governments”Reactions to Termination Policy: HCR 108 and PL 280 (Carleton College)
  4. More than half of the 109 tribes and bands that were terminated had their ancestral homelands in Oregon.Losses and Gains for Tribes, Oregon History Project

Research notes. The text of HCR 108 itself ('freed from Federal supervision...') was not obtained from an opened page, so it is paraphrased through the Archives. Restoration dates (Menominee 1973, Siletz 1977, Klamath 1986, Ponca 1990, Catawba 1993), the 18 U.S.C. 1162(b) fishing clause, and Menominee Tribe v. United States (1968) from the input were not verified here. The 'destroy tribal governments' quote is the NCAI's, from a student/course page. Total tribes terminated is disputed (60 proceedings vs about 109 tribes and bands).

Treaty or agreementShapes from the 1899 federal record: approximate, not legal boundaries.

Who is doing the work

This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:

Working with these nations

Land return and Native-led work nearby

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Nations named 5

Located in 3

Carried out through 2

Taken to court in 1

Policy era 1

Concerns the instrument 1

Sources

  1. supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/391/404/legal text copy
  2. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-67/pdf/STATUTE-67-Pg588.pdfprimary record
  3. archives.gov/research/native-americans/terminationprimary record
  4. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-67/pdf/STATUTE-67-PgB132.pdfprimary record
The record’s fields
Nations
More than 100 tribes and bands over the period (counts vary); named in HCR 108: Flathead, Klamath, Menominee, Potawatomi (KS/NE), Turtle Mountain Chippewa, and all tribes in California, Florida, New York and Texas
What happened
Termination policy: House Concurrent Resolution 108 (1953) and Public Law 280 -- HCR 108 (Aug. 1, 1953) declared the sense of Congress that Indians should be 'freed from Federal supervision and control and from all disabilities and limitations specially applicable to Indians,' and named the tribes above. Public Law 280 (Aug. 15, 1953, 67 Stat. 588) gave California, Minnesota (except Red Lake), Nebraska, Oregon (except Warm Springs) and Wisconsin (except Menominee) criminal and civil jurisdiction in Indian country and let other states assume it. Its codification (18 U.S.C. 1162(b)) preserves hunting, trapping and fishing rights secured by federal treaty, agreement or statute. The National Archives states that Congress began 60 separate termination proceedings between 1953 and 1970, and that over three million acres of tribal land were relinquished; the Nixon administration repudiated termination in 1970.
Legal aftermath
Many terminated tribes were restored by statute from 1973 on (Menominee 1973, Siletz 1977, Klamath 1986, Ponca 1990, Catawba 1993). Menominee Tribe v. United States (1968) read PL 280 with the Termination Act to preserve treaty hunting and fishing rights.
Kind
Violation
Confidence
High
Nation review
Not yet reviewed by this nation
Notes
  • Some details are disputed
  • Some details not yet checked against a source

Correct this record