From the New Republic: The Case for Tribal Statehood

I have never heard of such a thing, but now that I have it seems perfectly logical.

- Click here for the article.

American democracy is in distress, its future uncertain. No single solution will fix all its problems, but one popular idea of the past few years—on the left, anyway—is to grant statehood to Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. Doing so would first and foremost grant the people of the Caribbean territory and federal district, respectively, the representation in Congress and governmental autonomy that they deserve. It would also shake up the pro-rural—and thus pro-conservative—bias of the Electoral College and Senate. But a similar, complementary solution has been overlooked: tribal statehood.

In 1898, the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma (so named because of their willingness to adopt Western forms of economic and social ties) were facing a crisis. It had become clear the U.S. government was once again reneging on its promises by planning to abolish their tribal governments and force them to cede most of their land to white settlers. In response, the Five Tribes held a convention to form an Indian state. They drafted a constitution and proposed a state government for the potential Native American–controlled state of Sequoyah. The referendum was approved by a majority of Native American and white voters, but Congress never considered their request.

Instead, Oklahoma was admitted as a state in 1907, following President Theodore Roosevelt’s proposal to combine Oklahoma Territory with Indian Territory. Despite becoming part of the new state of Oklahoma, the people—and their lands—who would have formed the state of Sequoyah retained their separate legal status, as the Supreme Court in McGirt v. Oklahoma recently reaffirmed. Because tribal lands remain sovereign territories, tribes possess a constitutional pathway to an alternative form of self-governance. Tribes can seek statehood.