The legal documents used in United States court premises seem to be contradictory in some sense because they recognize the United States constitution as the law that is supreme, but also appreciate and recognize the sovereign nature of Native American nations. As such, due to the contradiction, the Native Americans have always suffered and the contradiction in the laws has persisted for over two centuries (Wilkins 41). This contradiction of laws has been at the detriment of Native Indians by failing to identify their unique status as original inhabitants of the continent. The American Indians are unique to the rest of the American population, primarily because of their genesis as the original residents of the country before the invasion by Europeans. There are in excess of 561 communities of American Indians across the United States alone. Their situation differs from that of ethnic minorities such as African Americans, Latino Americans and Asian Americans because they constitute nations in a fundamental sense. Indeed, these communities reside in specific territories and wield some form of government jurisdiction and control (Wilkins 41).
Before the arrival of colonialists, the aboriginal tribes had clear systems of government which were geographically defined, with appropriate political and social systems as opposed to ethnic minorities in the United States. These tribes negotiated treaties and deals with the Europeans and later with the United States government, resulting in their unique status as nations rather than minorities. The presence of nation-to-nation treaties signed by the tribes with non-tribal members distinguishes the Native American Indians from other communities (Wilkins 42). In fact, other ethnic minorities did not sign any treaties and deals in the past which underlines the premise that aboriginal communities were indeed distinct nations and not minorities. However, due to the contradiction of laws, the American Indians have now been relegated to ethnic minorities.
The trust doctrine expressly differentiates the indigenous peoples from racial minorities. President Clinton in 1998 clarified the legal relationship that the United States has with various indigenous tribal governments. Indigenous nations have been federal government protectorates since the formation of the Union and operate as domestic dependent nations (Wilkins 44). The idea of congressional plenary power clearly distinguishes the relationship between aboriginal tribes and the federal government from that between the federal government and the racial minorities. A close examination of the federal constitution, in the famous commerce clause, first article, eighth section and third clause, grants congress the only authority to regulate commerce between sovereign nations, various states within the union and with Indian tribes. This shows that the aboriginal communities are recognized by the federal constitution as distinct nations under its protection. The word plenary may also be taken to mean preemptive, which can be explained by the case United States vs. Wheeler, where the Supreme Court held that Congress possessed plenary power over Indian tribes, including their system of governance (Wilkins 45). Therefore, the concept of plenary power is also disadvantageous to indigenous communities.
Indigenous people have signed various treaties in the course of history which distinguishes them from ethnic and racial minorities and recognizes them as nations. The Treaty with Delaware Tribe on September seventeenth 1778 was the first formally written treaty that entailed diplomacy and the use of legal language. The treaty promised the representation of the Delaware Nation in Congress upon joining the confederation (Wilkins 49). The American Indians enjoy various benefits that distinguish them from other communities. However, they often have to prove their ethnicity through blood composition tests to get these benefits. The role of DNA testing in the proof of American Indian ancestry cannot be discounted. An autosomal DNA test is conducted in order to weed out imposters from real American Indians. Naturally, people tend to take advantage of such loopholes to share benefits meant for American Indians which has prompted the United States government to coin ingenious ways of proving their identities (Prucha 44). The use of these tests is important both for enrolment into nations and disenrollment from Native nations such as in the case of Cherokee Nation vs. Raymond Nash (Prucha 44). Unlike minorities such as the African Americans that were largely segregated, Indian Americans enjoyed boarding schools in the past and these boarding schools were instrumental in transforming them to modernity. The concept entailed indoctrination, education and assimilation. Some of these boarding schools included the Carlisle Indian School, Hampton Indian School and Phoenix Indian School. Unlike other colonialists, Colonel Richard Pratt believed in the transformation of Indians rather than their massacre (Pratt 1892).
The American Indians have endured a different form of historic injustice compared to other communities. A study by Congress in the 1970s showed that more than a quarter of the children in Indian reservations had been forcefully separated by various state agencies and placed in non-Indian adoptive or foster homes away from the reservations. The criterion that was widely used by state officials was the degree of poverty and their Indian ethnicity. This resulted in the (ICWA) Indian Child Welfare Act aimed at correcting the undesirable situation faced by Indians. The Act was aimed at limiting state powers of separating Indian children from their native families and by empowering tribal courts to preside over most custody cases (Pevar, 333).
Works Cited
Churchill Ward and Morris Glen., “Key Indian Laws and Cases” The State of Native America South End Press Boston (1992) Print.
Pevar Stephen., “Indian Child Welfare Act” The Rights of Indians and Tribes New York University Press (2004) Print.
Prucha Paul., “Cherokee Nation vs. Georgia: 1831” United States Indian Policy, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press (2000) Print.
Wilkins David., “Indian Peoples are Nations, Not Minorities” American Indian Politics and the American Political System Rowmon and Littlefield (2002) Print.
