Tribal Nations Leverage Historic Treaties to Challenge Federal and State Actions in Court
Native American tribes are suing federal and state governments to enforce more than 374 historic treaties, arguing that recent projects and policies violate their rights.
Across the country, Native American tribes are using the courts to enforce more than 374 treaties that the United States signed before it stopped creating new agreements in 1871. The Seneca Nation, for example, argues that a presidential directive to rename Lake Ontario breaches the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua, while other tribes contest water-rights allocations and the proposed rerouting of Enbridge’s Line 5 pipeline through the Straits of Mackinac.
Legal scholars say the Justice Department can file amicus briefs, but such support is infrequent, leaving tribes to defend their sovereignty alone. Climate change concerns feature prominently, with tribes linking treaty rights to protections against extractive projects and habitat loss. Recent Supreme Court decisions, such as the 5-4 ruling in Arizona v. Navajo Nation, illustrate the limits of federal obligations under historic treaties. Nonetheless, successful litigation has led to collaborations that may reduce future conflicts over land, water, and cultural practices.
Why it matters
The lawsuits test how historic treaties shape modern U.S. policy on land, water, and climate issues.
In this story
