175. Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton, January 20, 1975
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

277 from funds appropriated to the Indian Health Service for Indian health services or Indian health facilities; or (2) planning, training, evaluation or other activities designed to improve the capacity of a tribal organization to enter into a contract or contracts pursuant to section 103 of this Act. . . . effect on existing rights Sec. 110. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as— (1) affecting, modifying, diminishing, or otherwise impairing the sovereign immunity from suit enjoyed by an Indian tribe; or (2) authorizing or requiring the termination of any existing trust responsibility of the United States with respect to the Indian people. TITLE II—THE INDIAN EDUCATION ASSISTANCE ACT Sec. 201. This title may be cited as the “Indian Education Assistance Act.” Part A---Education of Indians in Public Schools Sec. 202. The Act of April 16, 1934 (48 Stat. 596), as amended, is further amended by adding at the end thereof the following new sections: “Sec. 4. The Secretary of the Interior shall not enter into any contract for the education of Indians unless the prospective contractor has submitted to, and has had approved by the Secretary of the Interior, an education plan, which plan, in the determination of the Secretary , contains educational objectives which adequately address the educational needs of the Indian students who are to be beneficiaries of the contract and assures that the contract is capable of meeting such objectives: Provided, That where students other than Indian students participate in such programs, money expended under such contract shall be prorated to cover the participation of only the Indian students. “Sec. 5 (a) Whenever a school district affected by a contract or contracts for the education of Indians pursuant to this Act has a local school board not composed of a majority of Indians, the parents of the Indian children enrolled in the school or schools affected by such contract or contracts shall elect a local committee from among their number. Such committee shall fully participate in the development of, and shall have the authority to approve or disapprove programs to be conducted under such contract or contracts, and shall carry out such other duties, and be so structured, as the Secretary of the Interior shall by regulation provide. . . . “Sec. 6. Any school district educating Indian students who are members of recognized Indian tribes, who do not normally reside in the State in which such school district is located, and who are residing in Federal boarding facilities for the purposes of attending public schools within such district may, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, be reimbursed by him for the full per capita costs of educating such Indian students.” . . . [U.S. Statutes at Large, 88:2203–14.] 175. Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton January 20, 1975 A major issue in the claims of Indians in the eastern states was whether section 4 of the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1790 (often mistakenly called the Nonintercourse Act), which prohibited cessions of Indian lands except under a federal treaty, applied to them. If it did, then land cessions made to eastern states after 1790 were invalid. When the Department of the Interior refused to take up the Passamaquoddies’ case because it claimed it had no trust responsibility toward the tribe, the Indians sued Secretary Morton. The decision of Judge Edward T. Gignaux, which supported the Indian position, began a new period in the history of the eastern tribes. . . . . [The plaintiffs’] basic position is that the Nonintercourse Act applies to all Indian tribes in the United States, including the Passamaquoddies , and that the Act establishes a 278 trust relationship between the United States and the Indian tribes to which it applies, including the Passamaquoddies. Therefore, they say, defendants may not deny plaintiffs ’ request for litigation on the sole ground that there is no trust relationship between the United States and the Tribe. In opposition , defendants and intervenor [the State of Maine] contend that only those Indian tribes which have been “recognized” by the Federal Government by treaty, statute or a consistent course of conduct are entitled to the protection of the Nonintercourse Act and, since the Passamaquoddies have not been “federally recognized,” the Act is not applicable to them. Defendants and intervenor also deny that the Nonintercourse Act creates any trust relationship between the United States and the Indian tribes to which it applies. . . . The rules of statutory interpretation by which the Court must be guided in determining the applicability of the Nonintercourse Act to the Passamaquoddies...