Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The policy for termination of tribes collided with the Native American peoples' own desires to preserve Native identity. The termination policy was changed in the 1960s and rising activism resulted in the ensuing decades of restoration of tribal governments and increased Native American self-determination.
House Concurrent Resolution 108 (H. Con. Res. 108), passed August 1, 1953, declared it to be the sense of Congress that it should be policy of the United States government to abolish federal supervision over American Indian tribes as soon as possible and to subject the Indians to the same laws, privileges, and responsibilities as other U.S. citizens. [1]
The Klamath Termination Act was a 1953 law under the US Indian termination policy.The Klamath tribe along with the Flathead, Menominee, Potawatomi, and Turtle Mountain Chippewa, as well as all tribes in the states of California, New York, Florida, and Texas were targeted for immediate termination by House Concurrent Resolution 108 of 1953.
From 1969 to 1974, the Richard Nixon administration made important changes to United States policy towards Native Americans through legislation and executive action. . President Richard Nixon advocated a reversal of the long-standing policy of "termination" that had characterized relations between the U.S. federal government and American Indians in favor of "self-determi
The ACCIP Termination Report: The Continuing Destructive Effects of the Termination Policy on California Indians, prepared by the Advisory Council on California Indian Policy in September, 1997 states that the Montgomery Creek Rancheria was one of the land bases of the Pit River Tribe and was never terminated. [20] 22. Mooretown Rancheria
Critics also characterize the law as part of the Indian termination policy between 1940 and 1960, which terminated the tribal status of numerous groups and cut off previous assistance to tribal citizens. [1] The Indian Relocation Act encouraged and forced Native Americans to move to cities for job opportunities. [1]
Catawba Indian Tribe, Inc., 476 U.S. 498 (1986), is an important U.S. Supreme Court precedent for aboriginal title in the United States decided in the wake of County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York State (Oneida II) (1985).
The selling of land as an economic stimulus to non-Indians was a direct result of poor economic conditions that the Menominee had been living in since termination. After successfully stopping the land development, DRUMS later began the fight to reverse termination and regain status as a federally recognized and sovereign Indian tribe.