Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States
- Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States
SCOTUSCase
Litigants=Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States
ArgueDate=
ArgueYear=
DecideDate=
DecideYear=1955
FullName=Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States
USVol=348
USPage=272
Citation=348 U.S. 272
Prior=Appeal from the United States Court of Claims
Subsequent=
Holding=Congress did not intend to grant the Tribe any permanent rights to the occupied lands and therefore Government did not owe Tribe compensation for timber taken from tribal-occupied lands in Alaska under the Fifth Amendment.
SCOTUS=1955-1956
Majority=Reed
JoinMajority=
NotParticipating=
LawsApplied=
"Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States", 348 U.S. 272 (1955)
Facts
Native tribe, a subgroup of the Tlingit people, brought an action in Court of Claims for compensation, under Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, for timber taken from tribal-occupied lands in Alaska authorized by the Secretary of Agriculture. Tribe contends it has “full proprietary ownership” or at least a recognized right to unrestricted possession. Government asserts the opposite. If Tribe has any rights, it is the right to use the land at Government’s will.
Procedural Posture
Tribe filed suit in US Court of Claims, which found that Indian tribe was an identifiable group residing in Alaska; its interest in the lands prior to purchase of Alaska was “original Indian title” but that such a title was not enough to bring suit because the Congress did not recognize legal rights of tribe for property ownership. Court of Claims dismissed Tribe's suit.
The Decision
Justice Reed, writing for the Court, stated that Congress did not intend to grant the Tribe any permanent rights to the occupied lands but had given permission to the Tribe to occupy land. Mere possession is not ownership. Under the concept of conquest, any title to the land was extinguished when the "white man" came per "Johnson v. M'Intosh". No case has held that taking of Indian title or use by Congress required compensation. Because no recognized title to land, no right to compensation under the 5th amendment.
ee also
*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 348
External links
Wikimedia Foundation.
2010.
Look at other dictionaries:
Aboriginal title in the United States — A document commemorating a 1636 conveyance of land from Narragansett chief Canonicus to Roger Williams The United States was the first jurisdiction to acknowledge the common law doctrine of aboriginal title (also known as original Indian title or … Wikipedia
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 348 — This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 348 of the United States Reports :* In re Isserman , ussc|348|1|1954 * Chandler v. Fretag , ussc|348|3|1954 * Offutt v. United States , ussc|348|11|1954 * McAllister v.… … Wikipedia
Aboriginal title — Protests of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, extinguishing aboriginal title to the foreshore and seabeds in New Zealand Aboriginal title is a common law doctrine that the land rights of indigenous peoples to customary tenure persist after the… … Wikipedia
Indian title — By virtue of prior occupancy of the continent of North America, at best, nothing more than a right of occupancy. Northwestern Bands of Shoshone Indians v United States, 324 US 335, 89 L Ed 985, 65 S Ct 690; nothing more than permissive occupancy; … Ballentine's law dictionary
Aboriginal title in California — Indigenous language regions in California (different colors indicate different languages; simila … Wikipedia
Nonintercourse Act — Not to be confused with the Non Intercourse Act (1809). The Nonintercourse Act (also known as the Indian Intercourse Act or the Indian Nonintercourse Act) is the collective name given to six statutes passed by the United States Congress in 1790,… … Wikipedia
Aboriginal title in the Marshall Court — Chief Justice John Marshall composed several early and influential opinions on … Wikipedia
Dawes Act — Not to be confused with Dawes Plan. The Dawes Act, adopted by Congress in 1887, authorized the President of the United States to survey Indian tribal land and divide the land into allotments for individual Indians. The Act was named for its… … Wikipedia
Aboriginal title in the Taney Court — Chief Justice Roger B. Taney (1836–1864) The Supreme Court of the United States, under Chi … Wikipedia
Aboriginal title in New Mexico — The status of aboriginal title in New Mexico is unique among aboriginal title in the United States. Despite explicit Congressional legislation, early decisions of the Supreme Court of the New Mexico Territory and the U.S. Supreme Court held that… … Wikipedia
