http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090703_11_A1_TheChe48934
Cherokees vow to fight BIA decision on their status
Questions have been raised about putting land into trust status.
By CLIFTON ADCOCK World Staff Writer
Published: 7/3/2009 2:21 AM
Last Modified: 7/3/2009 3:36 AM
The Cherokee Nation will likely appeal a decision by the new head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Larry EchoHawk, stating that the tribe is not the historical Cherokee tribe.
The decision, handed down last week, essentially puts the Cherokee Nation and the smaller United Keetoowah Band, both based in Tahlequah, on equal footing as far as authority over the 14-country jurisdictional area of the historical tribe.
While the decision did not put land into trust for the UKB, something it has long fought for, it did state that both tribes were "successors in interest" and descended from the historical Cherokee Nation, but neither was the original tribe itself.
"The historical Cherokee Nation no longer exists as a distinct political entity," Larry EchoHawk wrote. "There is no reason, on the face of the (1946 Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act), that the Keetoowah Band would have less authority than any other band or tribe."
While the UKB has declined to make any further statements on the decision, the Cherokee Nation has sought to downplay it and vowed to fight it.
"Although the letter has no legal effect right now, obviously, it has very damaging hyperbole in it," said Diane Hammons, Cherokee Nation attorney general. "We intend to exercise every legal right we have to correct that. We will appeal as soon as we legally can. We'll take every legal and political remedy available to us. This is very important to us even though it has no legal effect at this time."
Cherokee Nation spokesman Mike Miller said that BIA attorneys have argued that the Cherokee Nation is the historical tribe in the past, and questioned the reversal in the decision.
"I think it's a shocking coincidence," Miller said, adding that the Cherokee Nation wants to know who advised EchoHawk on the matter. "It's an unexplained reversal of policy in a huge, huge way."
Having land in trust is an essential element to tribal gaming operations and other matters of tribal sovereignty. EchoHawk said in the decision he could not rule on whether tribes that are successors to original tribes listed in the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act could stand in for the original tribe because of a recent U.S. Supreme Court Decision that states only tribes listed on the 1934 act can put land into trust.
EchoHawk also stated the decision on the UKB land into trust case, which has its origins in a 2004 attempt by the tribe to put land with a community services center on it in Tahlequah into trust, could have national consequences.
Though the Cherokee Nation has said that the decision may have no or little legal effect, it may have an effect on how the Bureau of Indian Affairs deals with the Cherokee Nation, UKB and other tribes in similar situations, said University of Kansas Law Professor Stacy Leeds, who directs the university's Tribal Law and Government Center.
"It's a decision about land into trust. It's certainly a good decision from the UKB's perspective. From the Cherokee Nation perspective, it raises questions," said Leeds, a member of the Cherokee Nation who once served on the tribe's Supreme Court. "It's legally binding as to whether the UKB can have land in trust."
The decision does, however, have wider implications, and tribes throughout the country will likely watch to see the results.
"It's definitely not just Oklahoma tribes going to be concerned about it, it's making a statement about reorganized tribes in this century and opining that they're not necessarily the historic nations that the treaties are with," Leeds said. "I think there a lot of tribes across the country, not just in Oklahoma, interested to see how this would play out."
The impact of the recent Supreme Court decision, a Rhode Island case known as Carcieri vs. Salazar, sent shock waves through Indian Country, and the BIA's handling of tribes in the future would likely be framed around the case, Leeds said.
"Anything substantial would have to come from a court case, but the bureau's position is how this issue will be framed moving forward," Leeds said.
But, no matter what the implications of EchoHawk's decision, the UKB is closer than ever to getting land into trust, Leeds said.
"It definitely changes the landscape for the UKB," Leeds said. "It has been foreclosed for the UKB for so long and this is the first opportunity for that door to be reopened."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clifton Adcock 581-8462
clifton.adcock@tulsaworld.com
