A TREATY IS A PROMISE. NOT A SUGGESTION.

JUSTICE · RACIAL JUSTICE

Published by Langhorne P. Breedlove

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2026 · 12:49 AM ET

Tags: Tribal Sovereignty · Treaties · Federal Trust Responsibility · Land Rights · Self-Determination

Dear fellow American proletariat: The United States likes to describe itself as a nation that keeps its word. That claim is somewhat easier to deliver in a speech than to explain to a sovereign Tribal nation still disputing the meaning of a treaty signed a century and a half ago. A promise does not become optional because the government that made it has acquired a larger flag, a bigger budget, or an extremely sophisticated filing system.

American Proletariat proposes a systematic, Tribal-led accounting of the federal government's treaty, statutory, and trust obligations, followed by enforceable plans to fulfill those obligations and strengthen Tribal self-government. This is not a claim that every Tribe signed the same treaty, or that every historical injury can be repaired with a single statute. It is a demand for legal specificity, direct government-to-government engagement, and remedies guided by the nations whose rights are at stake.

THE MANDATE

Audit the federal obligations owed to each federally recognized Tribal nation, including treaty rights, trust lands and resources, healthcare and education commitments, jurisdictional responsibilities, and binding statutes or agreements. Publish a nation-specific ledger of the obligation, legal authority, implementation agency, unresolved dispute, appropriate remedy, annual resources, and measurable deadline—with confidential and culturally sensitive information protected. Tribes must determine how to participate and what information may be published.

Strengthen Tribal control of governmental services, land stewardship, natural resources, cultural protection, economic development, and adjudication wherever law permits, while pursuing negotiated statutory changes where current law limits those powers. AP's obligation is not to replace decisions made in Washington with identical decisions made by a newly assembled panel of well-meaning outsiders. Sovereignty means governments make their own decisions.

ROOTS & HISTORY

The United States began treaty relations with the Delaware Nation in 1778. Federal records describe hundreds of agreements negotiated with Native nations through the nineteenth century, addressing territory, political authority, peace, access to resources, and federal commitments. Congress ended new formal treaty-making with Tribal nations in 1871, but the 1871 law expressly preserved obligations under earlier lawfully ratified treaties. Ending the practice of making new promises did not erase the old ones. (Sources 01, 02)

Federal Indian policy moved through removal, allotment, assimilation, attempted termination, and modern self-determination. In 1975 Congress enacted the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, creating mechanisms through which Tribes could administer certain federally supported services themselves. Tribal self-government predates the United States; federal statutes and court rulings recognize, regulate, and sometimes restrict aspects of its exercise. (Sources 03, 04)

The Supreme Court's July 9, 2020 decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma held that the Muscogee (Creek) Reservation remained a reservation for purposes of federal criminal law because Congress had not disestablished it. The holding was carefully bounded: it did not restore all lands to Tribal ownership or decide every civil and criminal jurisdiction question. The lesson is nevertheless clear: a court interpreting treaty and statutory commitments must examine the actual legal record, not the convenience of pretending history has disappeared. (Source 05)

TODAY · THE EVIDENCE

The Bureau of Indian Affairs listed 575 federally recognized Tribes as of January 30, 2026. Federal recognition establishes a government-to-government relationship and certain eligibility for services; it does not mean each nation has an identical land base, treaty text, governmental structure, or remedy. Alaska Native villages and Tribal nations elsewhere have distinct histories and arrangements that require their own examination. (Source 06)

The Congressional Research Service's April 2026 overview describes the federal trust responsibility as grounded in treaties, congressional acts, and court decisions, including fiduciary duties concerning certain Tribal and individual trust assets. Trust lands, natural resources, and funds require accurate accounting and stewardship. A trust responsibility is not equivalent to an unrestricted federal authority to dictate every choice of a sovereign nation. (Source 07)

The Government Accountability Office reported in January 2026 that shared land- and water-management agreements can give Tribal governments substantive, continuing input into stewardship of ancestral territories now managed by federal agencies, but varying agency authorities can limit those opportunities. It recommended additional steps, including potential congressional action. This is a practical example of the difference between recognizing a relationship in a speech and equipping institutions to honor it. (Source 08)

A September 2026 Congressional Research Service study notes that Congress has not established one universal Tribal consultation mandate applying across all federal actions. Different laws and agency policies use different consultation procedures and have different legal force. An invitation to comment on a nearly completed decision is not always the same thing as an enforceable right to participate in making it. (Source 09)

THE LEGAL PATH

Treaties, congressional enactments, executive actions, court decisions, and Tribal law operate together in federal Indian law. Congress holds broad legislative authority in this field, but its actions may trigger constitutional, statutory, and trust-related constraints. Executive agencies must comply with existing law; courts adjudicate specific disputes; and Tribal governments exercise inherent governmental powers subject to applicable limits. The proper route depends on the exact right, nation, territory, and remedy—not a generalized proclamation restoring sovereignty. (Sources 03, 05, 10)

Existing self-governance statutes authorize negotiated funding agreements for certain programs and explicitly refer to treaty obligations and the federal trust responsibility. They do not automatically transfer all federal lands or criminal jurisdiction to every Tribe. Statutory amendments, compacts, property actions, court orders, and appropriations must be designed around each issue, including the interests and legal rights of non-Tribal residents when relevant. (Source 11)

THE PLAN

01 · ASK THE NATIONS, NOT JUST THE AGENCIES

Invite each Tribal government, through a process it recognizes as legitimate, to determine whether and how it participates. Fund Tribal-led legal research, translation, mapping, historical documentation, consultation, and independent counsel. Do not demand public disclosure of sacred sites, confidential governance records, or sensitive cultural knowledge as the price of a federal remedy.

02 · INVENTORY EVERY ENFORCEABLE OBLIGATION

Build a nation-specific inventory of treaty provisions, statutory promises, trust assets, water and resource rights, jurisdiction, educational obligations, healthcare arrangements, and outstanding judicial orders. Distinguish enforceable duties from broader historical and moral claims; the latter may support negotiated reparative policy, but should not be misrepresented as settled judgments. Give each claim a source, responsible federal entity, legal status, and dispute-resolution pathway.

03 · FUND SELF-GOVERNMENT AND SERVICES

Strengthen lawful self-determination contracts, compacts, and Tribal administration of programs. Evaluate stable multiyear funding and the full costs of administering services, including workforce, facilities, technology, and compliance. Track whether funding reaches the intended nation and supports priorities it defines. An agency cannot claim to have transferred control when it retains every meaningful decision and sends the invoice to the Tribe.

04 · LAND, WATER & CULTURAL STEWARDSHIP

Evaluate land-into-trust proposals, restoration and co-management agreements, access to treaty-reserved resources, protection of burial and sacred sites, and enforceable water arrangements. Identify title, neighboring rights, existing permits, state and federal jurisdiction, environmental requirements, and Tribal consent. A land remedy is a legal and geographic question, not an inspirational photograph.

05 · MAKE CONSULTATION MEANINGFUL

Consider a statutory minimum standard for timely, government-to-government consultation when federal actions substantially affect Tribal rights or resources. Establish early notice, sufficient time and information, documented responses, and review procedures while distinguishing consultation from consent, co-management, or veto authority. Negotiate stronger consent requirements where legally and practically justified, rather than pretending that every current consultation rule already provides one.

06 · AN INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTING AND DISPUTE PROCESS

Fund independent auditing, mediation, judicial access, and public progress reporting, with Tribes controlling protected materials. Prioritize obligations subject to existing judgments, imminent resource damage, severe service gaps, or agreed deadlines, while avoiding a process in which the federal government alone decides which obligations are inconvenient enough to postpone.

THE TEN-YEAR LEDGER

YEAR ONE · ESTIMATE PENDING. Establish the enacted federal baseline for Bureau of Indian Affairs programs, Indian Health Service commitments, trust-fund management, Tribal self-governance compacts, land and water stewardship, and relevant infrastructure programs. Cost legal and archival research, Tribal participation, staffing, consultation reform, accounting systems, and immediate court-ordered or time-sensitive remedies. Do not add the whole current Indian Health Service budget as though AP were creating it from nothing.

YEARS TWO THROUGH TEN · ESTIMATE PENDING. Present separate annual totals for legally enforceable obligations, negotiated settlements, land and water actions, capital investments, recurring program operations, Tribal administrative capacity, federal oversight, and litigation or compliance costs. Record offsets only when supported by law and credible budget modeling; do not turn noncash land transfers or hypothetical economic benefits into fictional Treasury receipts. Report federal and Tribal fiscal effects separately and avoid treating resources held in trust as federal spending money.

The cost cannot responsibly be derived by multiplying 575 by a uniform grant amount. Each Tribal nation has different circumstances, rights, assets, obligations, and priorities. Congress should require a detailed ten-year baseline-versus-proposal model, with documented low, central, and high scenarios, explicit uncertainty, and a way to incorporate subsequently adjudicated duties without concealing them in an average.

WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

One-size-fits-all reform can reproduce the very paternalism it claims to correct. Federal agencies may consult the wrong representatives, treat a public meeting as consent, or publish culturally restricted material. A rigid national formula could undervalue remote communities, distinct treaty guarantees, or claims still before a court. Conversely, poorly defined remedies could create litigation over land title, water allocations, taxation, or jurisdiction affecting Tribal and non-Tribal residents.

Competing legal interpretations are real. Courts have limited certain Tribal civil and criminal authorities, and state powers can depend on federal statutes and particular Supreme Court decisions. In 2022, Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta recognized concurrent state jurisdiction for certain crimes by non-Indians against Indians in Indian country, illustrating that McGirt did not settle every jurisdictional issue. Disagreement over legal scope deserves careful analysis—not the assertion that one court opinion has transferred every power or resolved every treaty. (Source 12)

Administrative capacity and funding can also lag behind promises. A federal commitment to respect Tribal government is hollow if agencies withhold necessary records, delay funds, or make genuine self-determination contingent on endless forms. Independent audits and Tribal-defined performance measures should expose those failures without shifting responsibility for them to the communities harmed.

MEASURING SUCCESS

Publish, with Tribal approval and safeguards, the share of inventoried obligations with verified legal documentation; adjudicated and negotiated resolutions; compliance with court orders and funding agreements; the condition of trust assets; time to respond to consultation; land and resource stewardship outcomes; and program services delivered under Tribal direction. Report disputes and unresolved claims, not just ribbon-cuttings. Independent review should include both Tribal representatives and relevant legal or technical specialists.

THE POINT

America cannot claim that its word is sacred while treating promises to Tribal nations as ceremonial decorations to be displayed during heritage month and forgotten when a land-use permit arrives. At the same time, honoring sovereignty requires respecting each Tribal government's authority to define its own priorities, negotiate its own agreements, and challenge the federal government under the law.

The policy is not a promise that one national commission can undo centuries of dispossession. It is a proposal to identify obligations with precision, fund lawful remedies, and give sovereign nations meaningful control over their futures. The public can disagree about a proposed remedy. It should at least know what was promised, what the law requires, and what remains unpaid.

E pluribus unum, bitches.

SOURCES & FURTHER READING

01 · National Archives — Senate Records Relating to American Indian Treaties, 1789–1871. https://www.archives.gov/legislative/research/getting-started/american-indian-treaties

02 · Library of Congress — American Indian Law: Treaties and the 1871 enactment. https://guides.loc.gov/american-indian-law/Treaties

03 · Bureau of Indian Affairs — Federal Law and Indian Policy Overview. https://www.bia.gov/bia/history/IndianLawPolicy

04 · Bureau of Indian Affairs — About the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act. https://www.bia.gov/bia/ois/dsd/Training/About

05 · Supreme Court of the United States — McGirt v. Oklahoma, 591 U.S. 894 (2020), July 9, 2020. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

06 · Bureau of Indian Affairs — Tribal Leaders Directory, 575 Federally Recognized Tribes as of January 30, 2026. https://www.bia.gov/service/tribal-leaders-directory

07 · Congressional Research Service — Federal Management of Tribal Trust Funds, updated April 24, 2026. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/IF13173.html

08 · Government Accountability Office — Federal Land and Water Management: Additional Actions Would Strengthen Agreements with Tribes, January 28, 2026. https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-26-106626

09 · Congressional Research Service — Federal-Tribal Consultation: Background and Issues for Congress, updated September 23, 2026. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R48093.html

10 · Bureau of Indian Affairs — Tribal Government Powers, Rights, and Authorities. https://www.bia.gov/frequently-asked-questions

11 · U.S. Code — 25 U.S.C. § 5363, Tribal Self-Governance Funding Agreements. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/25/5363

12 · Supreme Court of the United States — Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, 597 U.S. 629 (2022). https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/21-429

10 RECOMMENDED ARTICLES, ESSAYS & POLICIES

→ Explore Tribal Sovereignty, Treaties & Federal Trust Obligations

→ Explore Tribal Infrastructure, Health, Housing & Land Restoration

→ Explore Indigenous Historical Truth & Restoration

→ Explore Digital Public-Access Media

→ Explore Graduated Corporate Taxation

→ Explore Greens

→ Explore Libertarians

→ Explore Reformers, Abolitionists & Civil Rights

→ Explore Monarchy, Empire & Historical Powers

→ Explore Public Ferries, Waterways, Locks & Water Access

WE ARE ONE.  ·  E PLURIBUS UNUM.