Introduction
There have occurred continued misunderstandings on the constitutionality of several Indian laws that were previously passed by the U.S Congress. Differences over their constitutionality led to the involvement of the Supreme Court which was to make decisions on whether they were constitutional or not. Among the areas that differed upon were land grants, casino operations as well as religious rights which were considered unconstitutional due to limitations on their implementation. Duthu (2008 p.45)
Unconstitutional Indian Laws
The law on land grants was passed by Congress allowing the government to issue grants to individual citizens in exchange for their indigenous land. The law resulted from the inability of some Indian tribes to occupy land that belonged to their ancestors. Therefore, congress promised to protect these Indian tribes and also give them some additional funds annually for their upkeep. Financial support was also promised to the priest who would be in charge of the Indian tribes’ religious affairs and even more to fund the construction of their churches.
The total amount of financial support that the U.S government promised to Indian tribes was equivalent to the amount needed to compensate them for land that was originally owned by their ancestors. However, Supreme Court did not agree with the constitutionality of this law that allowed the government to make direct negotiations and payments with individual citizens. It argued that Indian citizens, as well as Indian religious practices, were not allowed to act contrary to American laws. It also argued that agreements regarding money set aside to fund religious undertakings together with land compensation were unconstitutional as they also violated Religion clauses. Wilkins (1997 p.20)
IGRA was an act that was designed to regulate Indian games in casinos and was also among the laws that Supreme Court considered unconstitutional. The Act allowed Indians to play games in their casinos without being taxed. One category of the Act allowed games’ regulation by both the states as well as the tribes where regulatory jurisdiction would be shared within state borders. Games of a particular class three were also permitted and were to be played in states where it was legal.
Regulation of the gaming of class three that comprised of card games as well as slot machines was the area that brought differences on perceptions of its constitutionality and the Supreme Court had to conduct ruling.
After extensive considerations, Supreme Court regarded the inclusion of card games as well as slot machines in the list of those games that should be legally played in casinos as unconstitutional. This was as a result of the violation of previous agreements on the country’s budget where gaming of class three required large amounts of money that were unhealthy for the country’s economic situation. Law only allowed individuals to privately rent properties for these games since the government could not afford to offer them freely in clubs. Magill (2006 p.63)
Reorganization Act for the Indians was yet another area that was considered unconstitutional by Supreme Court. This law was designed to allow Indians to manage their assets, which in this case was land. This would bring forced integration of land practice to an end as self-government by individual tribes would be increased. Written constitutions as a way of strengthening the structure of Indian tribes were encouraged in order to revive the traditions as well as Indian cultures that had been restricted by the government.
However, difficulties that emerged in its implementation led to its presentation before Supreme Court for examination. Supreme Court regarded it unconstitutional arguing that, the department that was supposed to control land owned by Indian tribes would not operate without the control of the federal government. Axon (2005 p.16)
Conclusion
Research shows that some Indian laws did not fully meet U.S constitution requirements which brought conflicting ideas on their implementation. This called for Supreme Court’s intervention to settle conflicts that were related to Indian laws. Supreme Court considered several laws designed for Indian tribes unconstitutional which made them be removed from the constitution. This called for extensive consideration of the areas that brought conflicts in order for them to be revised before being included in the constitution again. Wilkins (1997 p.21)
References
Axon T. (2005): Americas Review, Queensland: Knowledge books & software p. 16.
Duthu B. (2008): American Indians and the law, New York: Viking p. 45.
Magill F. (2006): Great events from history, Loring Avenue: Salem Press p. 63.
Wilkins D. (1997): American sovereignty and the U.S Supreme Court, Texas: University of Texas Press pp. 20-21.