Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-qr8hc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-22T11:21:09.920Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Making Strategic Choices: How and Why Indian Groups Advocated for Federal Recognition from 1977 to 2012

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2024

Kirsten Matoy Carlson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

How and why do groups employ law strategically in different venues? This article combines theoretical and methodological insights from sociolegal and interest-group studies to investigate how and why nonfederally recognized Indian groups used administrative and legislative strategies for federal recognition from 1977 to 2012. By detailing the circumstances leading Indian groups to employ varying strategies, it provides a more nuanced understanding of the dynamic interplay among the goals, motivations, and constraints influencing groups to use administrative and legislative processes over time.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 51 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 930 - 965
Copyright
© 2017 Law and Society Association.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

Abel, Richard (1998) “Speaking Law to Power: Occasions for Cause Lawyering,” in Sarat, Austin & Scheingold, Stuart, eds., Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Adcock, Robert (2014) “Generalization in Comparative and Historical Social Science: The Difference that Interpretivism Makes,” in Yanow, Dvora & Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine, eds., Interpretation and Method: Empirical Research Methods and the Interpretive Turn, 2nd ed. Armonk: M.E. Sharp.Google Scholar
Barker, Joanne (2005–06) “Recognition,” 46 American Studies 133.Google Scholar
Barnes, Jeb & Burke, Thomas F. (2012) “Making Way: Legal Mobilization, Organizational Response, and Wheelchair Access,” 46 Law & Society Rev. 167–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, Frank R., et al. (2009) Lobbying and Policy Change: Who Wins, Who Loses, and Why. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehmke, Frederick J. & Witmer, Richard (2012) “Indian Nations as Interest Groups: Tribal Motivations for Contributions to U.S. Senators,” 65 Political Research Q. 179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehmke, Frederick J., Gailmard, Sean, & Wiggins Patty, John (2013) “Business as Usual: Interest Group Access and Representation Across Policy-Making Venues.” 33 J. of Public Policy 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brigham, John (1987) “Right, Rage, and Remedy: Forms of Law in Political Discourse,” in Orren, Karen & Stephen Skowrenek, eds., Studies in American Political Development. Vol. 2. Cambridge, Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burstein, Paul (2014) American Public Opinion, Advocacy, and Policy in Congress: What the Public Wants and What It Gets. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Kirsten Matoy (2015) “Congress and Indians,” 86 Univ. of Colorado Law Rev. 77.Google Scholar
Carlson, Kirsten Matoy (2016) “Congress, Tribal Recognition, and Legislative-Administrative Multiplicity,” 91 Indiana Law Rev. 955–1021.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Daniel (2017) “On the Emergence of the Administrative Petition: Innovations in Nineteenth-Century Indigenous North America,” in Parrillo, N., ed., Administrative Law from the Inside Out: Essays on Themes in the Work of Jerry L. Mashaw. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, Samuel R. (2002) “The Monacan Indian Nation: Asserting Tribal Sovereignty in the Absence of Federal Recognition,” 17 Wicazo Sa Rev. 91–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corntassel, Jeff & Witmer, Richard C. II (2008) Forced Federalism: Contemporary Challenges to Indigenous Nationhood. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Cramer, Renee Ann (2008) Cash, Color, and Colonialism: The Politics of Tribal Acknowledgement. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Cummings, Scott L. & Rhode, Deborah L. (2009) “Public Interest Litigation: Insights from Theory and Practice,” 36 Fordham Urban Law J. 603–51.Google Scholar
Cummings, Scott L. & NeJaime, Douglas (2010) “Sexuality and Gender Law: Assessing the Field, Envisioning the Future,” 57 UCLA Law Rev. 1235–330.Google Scholar
Epp, Charles R. (1998) The Rights Revolution. Chicago: The Univ. of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, Matthew L. M. (2006) “Politics, History, and Semantics: The Federal Recognition of Indian Tribes,” 82 North Dakota Law Rev. 487.Google Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1974) “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change,” 9 Law & Society Rev. 95–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galanter, Marc (1983) “The Radiating Effects of Courts,” in Boyum, Keith O. & Lynn Mather, eds., Empirical Theories About Courts. New Orleans: Quid Pro Books.Google Scholar
Gardner, Ray (2007) “The Chinook Nation and Its Struggle for Federal Recognition,” in Horse Capture, George, Champagne, Duane, & Jackson, Chandler C., eds., American Indian Nations: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Lanhan, MD: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
Godwin, Ken, Ainsworth, Scott H., & Godwin, Erik (2013) Lobbying and Policymaking: The Public Pursuit of Private Interests. Los Angeles: Sage Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg-Ambrose, Carole (1994) “Of Native Americans and Tribal Members: The Impact of Law on Indian Group Life,” 28 Law & Society Rev. 1123–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Handler, Joel F. (1978) Social Movements and the Legal System. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hanson, Kenneth N. & Skopek, Tracy A. (2011) The New Politics of Indian Gaming: The Rise of Reservation Interest Groups. Las Vegas: Univ. of Nevada Press.Google Scholar
Holyoake, Thomas T. (2003) “Choosing Battlegrounds: Interest Group Lobbying across Multiple Venues,” 56 Political Research Q. 325–36.Google Scholar
Hoxie, Fredrick E. (2012) This Indian Country: American Indian Activists and the Place They Made. New York: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
Newton, Nell Jessup (2006) Cohen's Handbook of Federal Indian Law. Newark, NJ: Lexis Nexis.Google Scholar
Klopotek, Brian (2011) Recognition Odyssey: Indigeneity, Race, and Federal Recognition in Three Lousiana Communities. Durham: Duke Univ. Press.Google Scholar
Leachman, Gwendolyn M. (2014) “From Protest to Perry: How Litigation Shaped the LGBT Movement's Agenda,” 47 Univ. of California, Davis Law Rev. 1667–751.Google Scholar
Lowery, David (2007) “Why Do Organized Interests Lobby? A Multi-Goal, Multi-Context Theory of Lobbying,” 39 Polity 29–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, Dale W. (2000) Indian Gaming: Tribal Sovereignty and American Politics. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael (1991) “Legal Mobilization and Social Reform Movements: Notes on Theory and Its Application,” 11 Studies in Law, Politics, and Society 225–54.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael (1994) Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael (1996) “Causal v. Constitutive Explanations (or, On the Difficulty of Being so Positive,” 21 Law & Social Inquiry 457–82.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael & Silverstein, Helena (1998) “Rethinking Law's Allurements,” in Sarat, Austin & Scheingold, Stuart, eds., Cause Lawyering: Political Commitments and Professional Responsibilities. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
McKay, Amy Melissa (2011) “The Decision to Lobby Bureaucrats,” 147 Public Choice 123–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuide, Bryan S. (2010) “Interest Groups, Political Institutions, and Strategic Choices: What Influences Institutional Lobbying Strategies.” Paper presented at the American Political Science Association Conference, Washington, DC, 2–4 Sept 2010.Google Scholar
Meyer, David S. & Boutcher, Steven A. (2007) “Signals and Spillover: Brown v. Board of Education and Other Social Movements,” 5 Perspectives on Politics 81–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Mark Edwin (2004) Forgotten Tribes: Unrecognized Indians and the Federal Acknowledgment Process. Lincoln: Univ. of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Miller, Mark Edwin (2013) Claiming Tribal Identity: The Five Tribes and the Politics of Federal Acknowledgment. Norman: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Moberg, Mark & Moberg, Tawnya Sesi (2005) “The United Houma Nation in the U.S. Congress: Corporations, Communities, and the Politics of Federal Acknowledgment,” 34 (Spring) Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development 85–124.Google Scholar
Pralle, Sarah B. (2003) “Venue Shopping, Political Strategy, and Policy Change: The Internationalization of Forest Advocacy,” 23 J. of Public Policy 233–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rand, Kathryn R. L. & Light, Steven A. (1996–97) “Virtue or Vice? How IGRA Shapes the Politics of Native American Gaming, Sovereignty, and Identity,” 4 Virginia J. of Social Policy & Law 381–437.Google Scholar
Rand, Kathryn R. L. & Light, Steven A. (2005) Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise. Lawrence: Univ. of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Rhode, Deborah L. (2007–08) “Public Interest Law: The Movement at Midlife,” 60 Stanford Law Rev. 2027–86.Google Scholar
Riley, Lorinda (2013) “Shifting Foundation: The Problem with Inconsistent Implementation of Federal Recognition Regulations,” 37 N.Y.U. Rev. of Law and Social Change 629–69.Google Scholar
Robinson, John R. (2013) “From ‘Boston Men’ to the BIA: The Unacknowledged Chinook Nation,” in Den Ouden, Amy E. & O'Brien, Jean M., eds., Recognition, Sovereignty Struggles and Indigenous Rights in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Univ. of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, Gerald (1991) The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change? Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin (1990) “‘… The Law Is All Over’: Power, Resistance and the Legal Consciousness of the Welfare Poor,” 2 Yale J. Law & Humanities 343–79.Google Scholar
Sarat, Austin & Kearns, Thomas R. (1993) “Beyond the Great Divide: Forms of Legal Scholarship and Everyday Life,” in Sarat, Austin & Kearns, Thomas R., eds., Law in Everyday Life. Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilling, Vincent (2013) “Duwamish Chairwoman Speaks About Fighting for Federal Recognition and Getting Another Chance.” Indian Country Media Network. Available at: https://indiancountrymedianetwork.com/news/politics/duwamish-chairwoman-speaks-about-fighting-for-federal-recognition-and-getting-another-chance/ (accessed 7 September 2017).Google Scholar
Schwartz-Shea, Peregrine & Yanow, Dvora (2013) Interpretive Research Design: Concepts and Processes. Florence: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shield, James Parker (2007) “Tribal Nationalism: The Concept of Governmental Recognition of Tribes and the Little Shell Chippewa Tribe,” in Horse, Capture, George, Duane Champagne, & Jackson, Chandler C., eds., American Indian Nations: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow. Lanham, MA: Altamira Press.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Gordon (2009) Law's Allure: How Law Shapes, Constrains, and Kills Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Silverstein, Helena (1996) Unleashing Rights: Law, Meaning, and the Animal Rights Movement. Ann Arbor: The Univ. of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Richard A. (1995) “Interest Group Influence in the U.S. Congress,” 20 Legislative Q. 89–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Rogers M. (1988) “Political Jurisprudence, the ‘New Institutionalism,’ and the Future of Public Law,” 82 The American Political Science Rev. 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. General Accountability Office (GAO) (2001) Indian Issues: Improvements Needed in Tribal Recognition Process. GAO-02-49.Google Scholar
Wasby, Stephen L. (2000) “Litigation and Lobbying as Complementary Strategies for Civil Rights,” in Gofman, Bernard,ed., Legacies of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Charlottesville, VA: Univ. of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
Wilkins, David E. & Stark, Heidi K. (2010) American Indian Politics and the American Political System, 3rd ed. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Woodward, Jennifer (2015) “Making Rights Work: Legal Mobilization at the Agency Level,” 49 Law & Society Rev. 691–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yanow, Dvora (2000) Conducting Interpretative Policy Analysis. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cases Cited

California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987).Google Scholar
Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians v. U.S. Attorney, 369 F.3d 960 (2004).Google Scholar
United States v. Sandoval, 231 U.S. 28 (1913).Google Scholar

Statues Cited

California Rancheria Act, Pub. L. 85–671 (1958).Google Scholar
Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994, Pub. L. No. 103–454, 108 Stat. 4781, 4782.Google Scholar
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.).Google Scholar
Termination Act of 1953, H.R. Con. Res. 108, 83rd Cong.Google Scholar