Chapter 3 Indian Land and Property: Title and Use
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

23 Indian Land and Property: Title and Use 23 P.83, n.28. Add the following to the end of the footnote before the period: ; see also Oglala Sioux Tribe v. United States Corps of Eng’rs, 570 F.3d 327, 331 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (“Congress deliberately used broad terminology in the Act in order to permit tribes to bring all potential historical claims and to thereby prevent them from returning to Congress to lobby for further redress”), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 3503 (2010) P.83, n.34. Add the following to line 3 of the footnote after the period: But the Act does, of course, preclude litigation of some claims. E.g., Oglala Sioux Tribe v. United States Corps of Eng’rs, 570 F.3d 327, 331–33 (D.C. Cir. 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 3503 (2010). Add the following to the end of the footnote: See also Michelle Smith & Janet C. Neuman, Keeping Indian Claims Commission Decisions in Their Place: Assessing the Preclusive Effect of ICC Decisions in Litigation Over Off-Reservation Treaty Fishing Rights, 31 U. Haw. L. Rev. 475 (2009) P.86, n.52. Replace “id” in line 1 with the following: Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida, 617 F.3d 114, 118 (2nd Cir. 2010) (disruptive possessory and nonpossessory claims to ancestral lands are subject to equitable defenses); Cayuga Indian Nation, 413 F.3d P.87, n.58. Add the following to line 3 of the footnote after the semi-colon: Unalachtigo Band of Nanticoke-Lanape Indians v. New Jersey, Civ. No. 05-5170, 2008 WL 2165191, at *15–16 (D.N.J. May 20, 2008) (dismissing on standing grounds Nonintercourse Act claim by group absent showing of successorship status to original tribe), vacated in part on other grounds, 606 F.3d 126 (3d Cir. 2010); Chapter 3 Indian Land and Property: Title and Use 24 2011 Supplement—American Indian Law Deskbook, Fourth Edition Add the following to line 1 of the footnote after “E.g.,”: Paiute-Shoshone Indians v. City of Los Angeles, 637 F.3d. 993, 998–99 (9th Cir. 2011) (court lacked jurisdiction over claim that a 1941 land conveyance from the United States to Los Angeles was illegal because the claim was not filed within the Indian Claims Commission Act’s statute of limitations); P.89, n.76. Add the following to line 7 of the footnote before the period: ; cf. Crow Creek Sioux Tribal Farms, Inc. v. IRS, 684 F. Supp. 2d 1152, 1159 (D.S.D. 2010) (expressing, in preliminary injunction context, uncertainty as to “whether a levy and seizure by the IRS [on tribally owned fee land] constitutes express consent of the United States to extinguish title, or whether this land is protected by the [Nonintercourse Act]”); see generally Brian Pierson, Resolving a Perilous Uncertainty: The Right of Tribes to Convey Fee Simple Lands, 57-APR Fed. Law. 49, 52 (2010) (“[f]ederal courts that have addressed the issue have overwhelmingly rejected any [25 U.S.C.] § 177 limitation on tribal authority over land owned in fee simple absolute title”) P.89, n.77. Add the following to the end of the footnote: A section of the Act, 25 U.S.C. § 479, defines “Indian” to include “members of any recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction.” Thus, to be entitled to the Secretary’s land acquisition authority a tribe had to be under federal jurisdiction when the IRA was enacted, that is, 1934. Carcieri v. Salazar , 129 S. Ct. 1058, 1064–65 (2009). Bills introduced in Congress to amend the IRA seek to overturn Carcieri. S. 676, 112th Cong. (2011); H.R. 1291, 112th Cong. (2010); H.R. 1234, 112th Cong. (2011). P.90, n.82. Add the following after “E.g.”: , Iowa Tribe v. Salazar, 607 F.3d 1225 (10th Cir. 2010); P.91, n.89. Add the following to line 1 of the footnote after “(en banc)”: , rev’d on other grounds, 129 S. Ct. 1058 (2009) Add the following to line 4 of the footnote after the period: Mich. Gambling Opposition v. Kempthorne, 525 F.3d 23, 30–33 (D.C. Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 1002 (2009); Delete the following from line 6 of the footnote: Mich. Gambling Opposition v. Norton, 477 F. Supp. 2d 1, 2–22 (D.D.C. 2007); 25 Indian Land and Property: Title and Use Add the following to line 15 of the footnote after the period: E.g., County of Charles...