HAUDENOSAUNEE FILE BRIEF TO SUPPORT THE CAYUGA

In 2001, the Cayuga Indian Nation of New York and the Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma won a ground-breaking victory in their land claim against the State of New York. The Federal court in Syracuse Ruled that the Cayugas were entitled to nearly $250 million in compensation for the loss of their lands through illegal treaties with New York in the late 1700s and early 1800s. These treaties violated the Indian Trade and Intercourse Act of 1790, which was created to protect Indian Nations from being plundered by State governments.

Before any money was paid, the State of New York appealed the Ruling, and in 2005 the Federal Appeals court in New York City overturned the decision. The Appeals court found that the Cayugas and the United States, who supported them in the case, had waited too long to file their claim in court, and that providing compensation now would be too "disruptive." The court's Ruling applied directly to the Cayugas, and it rewrote the rules for all the land claims pending in New York. Under the new rules, no Indian Tribe or Nation could count on winning its case. Even Tribes and Nations seeking a negotiated resolution to their land claims could be affected.

The Cayugas turned to the United States Supreme Court after their efforts to convince the Appeals court failed. In February of this year, the Cayugas asked the Court to review their case. The Supreme Court can choose whether or not it will review such cases, and they may be influenced in this decision not only by those directly involved in a given case, but also by others with a particular interest in the case. Recognizing the critical importance of the case, the Mohawk Nation Council of Chiefs, together with the Haudenosaunee, prepared a brief to the Supreme Court to ask it to hear the case.

In their brief, the Nation and the Haudenosaunee argued that the Supreme Court should take the case because the Appeals court Ruling against the Cayugas conflicted with well-established Federal law. The Nation argued that the Cayugas could not be accused of waiting too long to make their claim because the courts were not open to them until very recently. In addition, the Nation argued, to bar the Cayugas' claims would be unfair because New York had treated the Cayugas in such bad faith. The Nation and the Haudenosaunee tied these points in to the broader history of New York State's efforts to remove all the Haudenosaunee Nations from their lands. "The Mohawk/Haudenosaunee brief goes to the heart of the matter of whether a court can bar an Indian Nation simply because time has gone by," said Alex Page, an attorney for the Mohawk Nation Council of Chiefs. "It's a critical part of the effort to get the Supreme Court to review the Cayuga case and restore some justice to the Cayugas and other Indian Nations."

On the same day the brief was filed, the State of New submitted its brief arguing that the Supreme Court should not review the case. If the Supreme Court does not reverse the Appeals court decision, the result will be devastating to Native peoples who may forever lose their rights to sue for lands illegally taken. It is expected that the Supreme Court will decide whether or not to review the case by the middle of May.