Read Also: Federal Recognition, what is it?
Federal claims law recognizes that “a group of descendants of a once-organized tribe or band” can be treated as a proper, identifiable claimant group. This principle is central to the Pembina Band’s federal recognition, ensuring that the rights and identity of the band are preserved across generations.
Recent Legal Developments:
Following the Pembina Judgment Settlement, a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) was filed in the District Court of Washington, D.C., by Chief Ma’Lingaan A. Dennis Lambert and Chief Midegah David Taylor, in order to address whether the Turtle Mountain Indian Reservation’s land sale of 10 million acres nullifies or abrogates the Red Bear Pembina Band’s treaty rights. The Pembina Band had not signed the 1892 agreement, rejecting it because their 1863 treaty rights were within the land sale boundaries.
In August 2023, the District Court ruled that Chief Midegah David Taylor was listed in the Pembina Roll at the Pembina Database, the ruling order affirmed their 1789 Treaty of Harmar and 1863 Treaty of Old Crossing rights. The court declared that the Turtle Mountain Land Sale did not abrogate their rights, as they had not signed it. While the Turtle Mountain Band abrogates their rights to civil suits over Treaty matters related to land matters, Chief Midegah David Taylor and his family maintain access to civil suit remedies for their rights.
1. Treaty and Congressional Recognition
Federal Statutes and Treaty Commitments
1863 Old Crossing Treaty (Article IX): This treaty promised to “set apart” a 640-acre reservation for Chief Red Bear, highlighting the band’s recognized status and land rights.
1971 Act of Congress (H.R. 6072 (report 142-92), Public Law 92-59; 85 Stat. 158): This act directed the preparation of a roll of living descendants from the Pembina Band as it existed in 1863, ensuring fair distribution of judgment funds from Indian Claims Commission dockets. Also establishing whom had the qualified authority to speak for the Red Bear Chieftaincy.
2. Indian Claims Commission and Federal Claims Process
The Indian Claims Commission (ICC) proceedings have recognized the Pembina Band and its descendants as a distinct “identifiable group” for claims purposes. Federal courts have further reviewed representation and distribution disputes, reinforcing this recognition.
3. Judicial Recognition
U.S. Court of Claims and Related Federal Decisions
Red Lake, Pembina & White Earth Bands v. United States, 164 Ct. Cl. 389 (1964): This decision upheld the judgment related to the ICC award, recognizing the Pembina Band’s distinct status.
Red Lake & Pembina Bands v. Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, 173 Ct. Cl. 928 (1965): The court affirmed the Pembina descendants as an “identifiable group,” rejecting attempts by other tribal entities to exclude them from claims participation.
4. Representation Principle
No Single Group Automatically Speaks for All
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States, 490 F.2d 935 (Ct. Cl. 1974): This decision clarified that representation and entitlement in claims are determined by legal records and specific claimant groups, not by the assumption that one tribe represents all related communities.