Iroquois Land Claims and Federal Treaty Violations

Overview of Iroquois Land Claims

One of the most interesting legal questions in modern property law relates to claims by the Iroquois that the government—both the United States government and state governments—engaged in an illegal taking of their land and seeks the return of that land. While it is well known that the U.S. government took Native American land as its property, most private, public, and governmental property in the United States was at one time considered the territory of some group of Native Americans. The circumstances surrounding most of these land transfers were clearly advantageous to the U.S. government or state governments and coercive at best to the Native American groups in question. Many of the underlying treaties were signed by people in positions of power in the various Native American nations, tribes, or groups and in accordance with U.S. laws governing the formation of treaties with Indian nations.

However, the Iroquois claims are seen as being somewhat different from other claims for two reasons. First, some of the allegations are based on the notion that the treaties made between the State of New York and at least certain nations in the Six Nation Iroquois Confederacy (Haudenosaunee) were not signed by people in positions of power. Second, and more importantly, the Iroquois allege that the lands were unlawfully taken in violation of federal laws and treaties, most specifically the federal Trade and Intercourse Acts, 25 U.S.C.S. § 1777. Furthermore, they suggest that the United States knew this was occurring and failed to intervene and prevent it from happening, despite having an obligation in many instances to protect Iroquois interests because they were allies under other treaties or agreements. If this is the case, then the Iroquois allege that the treaties themselves are invalid and that they are entitled to the return of their land.

Legal Basis and Federal Protections

Further complicating the issue is the fact that the State of New York initially denied any wrongdoing. "Because of the turmoil and power allocations stemming from the Articles of Confederation, passed in 1781, and then the federal Constitution, ratified by New York in 1788, New York claimed the Non-Intercourse Act did not apply to its actions with tribes within its borders" (Fort, p. 6). In fact, the State actively interfered in treaty negotiations between the federal government and those tribes located within its borders in order to secure more Native American land (Fort, p. 6).

The time of the wrong was so long ago that legally, had the wrong occurred between two individuals, it would be impossible for any subsequent parties to seek redress. After all, it was during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries that New York State engaged in an effort to gather Iroquois lands. It did so in two ways: first, the state purchased some of the land, and second, the state seized some of the land. However, any transactions involving Indian land were subject to Congressional ratification, and New York never sought ratification of its actions. Instead, the state took the land without getting Congressional approval. The actions were illegal and, perhaps more importantly, were not actions between individuals but actions between governments, which would not be impacted by the same statutes of limitations as property actions between individuals. In fact, in the first lawsuit filed by an Iroquois Nation, the Supreme Court determined that "state statutes of limitations and other state law defenses were not applicable to such suits, and that title to lands taken in violation of the Trade and Intercourse Acts remains with the Indian owner" (Onondaga Nation, n.p.).