United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians

No. 79-639. Argued March 24, 1980. Decided June 30, 1980. 448 U.S. 371.

IV A

In reaching its conclusion that the 1877 Act effected a taking of the Black Hills for which just compensation was due the Sioux under the Fifth Amendment, the Court of Claims [448 U.S. 408] relied upon the "good faith effort" test developed in its earlier decision in Three Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation v. United States, 182 Ct.Cl. 543, 390 F.2d 686(1968). The Fort Berthold test had been designed to reconcile two lines of cases decided by this Court that seemingly were in conflict. The first line, exemplified by Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903), recognizes

"that Congress possesse[s] a paramount power over the property of the Indians, by reason of its exercise of guardianship over their interests, and that such authority might be implied, even though opposed to the strict letter of a treaty with the Indians" Id. at 565.

The second line, exemplified by the more recent decision in Shoshone Tribe v. United States, 299 U.S. 476 (1937), concedes Congress' paramount power over Indian property, but holds, nonetheless, that

"[t]he power does not extend so far as to enable the Government "to give the tribal lands to others, or to appropriate them to its own purposes, without rendering, or assuming an obligation to render, just compensation" Id. at 497 (quoting United States v. Creek Nation, 295 U.S. 103, 110 (1935)).

In Shoshone Tribe, Mr. Justice Cardozo, in speaking for the Court, expressed the distinction between the conflicting principles in a characteristically pithy phrase: "Spoliation is not management" 299 U.S. at 498. The Fort Berthold test distinguishes between cases in which one or the other principle is applicable:

"It is obvious that Congress cannot simultaneously

"(1) act as trustee for the benefit of the Indians, exercising its plenary powers over the Indians and their property, as it thinks is in their best interests, and

"(2) exercise its sovereign power of eminent domain, taking the Indians' property within the meaning of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. In any given situation in which Congress has acted with regard to Indian people, it must have acted either in one capacity or the other. Congress can own two hats, but it cannot wear them both at the same time. [448 U.S. 409]

"Some guideline must be established so that a court can identify in which capacity Congress is acting. The following guideline would best give recognition to the basic distinction between the two types of congressional action:

"where Congress makes a good faith effort to give the Indians the full value of the land, and thus merely transmutes the property from land to money, there is no taking. This is a mere substitution of assets or change of form, and is a traditional function of a trustee" 182 Ct.Cl., at 553, 390 F.2d at 691.

Applying the Fort Berthold test to the facts of this case, the Court of Claims concluded that, in passing the 1877 Act, Congress had not made a good faith effort to give the Sioux the full value of the Black Hills. The principal issue presented by this case is whether the legal standard applied by the Court of Claims was erroneous.{26}

Next Section>>>>