· 10/15/1910

Muskrat v. United States

Citations

46 Ct. Cl. 656

Syllabus

By the act 3d March, 1901, the Cherokees are made citizens of the United States. By the act 1st July, 1902, it is provided that the lands and the funds of the Cherokee Nation be allotted and distributed to all individual Chérokees living on the 1st September, 1902. This act contemplates the allotment of all the lands and makes no disposition of a surplus, if any. On the 26th April, 1906, the situation of the Cherokees is this: Land sufficient for 3,800 allotments has not been allotted; funds of the Cherokee Nation exceeding $2,000,000 remain in the Treasury of the United States; children have been born to the Cherokees since September 1, 1902, who, but for the limitation contained in the act 1st July, 1902, would be entitled to share equally with children born before that date. The questions in the case are these: Whether the Cherokees enrolled under the act 1st July, 1902, acquired an undivided individual proportionate interest in the surplus lands and funds of the nation which could not be taken away from them by the acts 26th April, 1906, and 21st June, 1906; whether Congress could enable the subsequently born Cherokee children to participate in the lands of the Cherokee Nation which had not been actually allotted; whether the act of 1902 did or did not make a grant in prwsmti to all Cherokees then living which (when ratified and the conditions described complied with) conferred vested rights that could not be taken away or impaired by legislation. The court below decides : I.All members of the Cherokee Nation on the 1st July, 1902, were citizens of the United States, and so are their children thereafter born. II.The Cherokee Nation has always been recognized as a distinct political community, subject only to the paramount authority of the United States. III. A tribal existence and government of the Cherokee Nation were still existing at the date of the acts B6th April cmd %lst June, 1906 (34 Stat. L., pp. 137, 341). IV. No c

About this case

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1911 United States Supreme Court case

Muskrat v. United States, 219 U.S. 346 (1911),[1] was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court delineated the authority of United States federal courts to hear certain kinds of cases under the Case or Controversy Clause of the United States Constitution .

Facts

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: Facts")
]

In this case, Congress passed a statute permitting certain Native Americans to bring suits against the United States to determine the constitutionality of a law allocating tribal lands, and providing that Counsel for both sides were to be paid from the United States Treasury . Several cases were brought pursuant to this statute, including suits brought by David Muskrat and J. Henry Dick opposing the partition of Indian lands, and by another pair, William Brown and Levi B. Gritts, opposing a prohibition against the sale of certain Indian lands.

Result

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Result")
]

The United States Supreme Court refused to allow the case to be heard, maintaining that, though the United States was named as a defendant , the case in question was not an actual controversy : rather, the statute was merely devised to test the constitutionality of a certain type of legislation, and the Court's ruling would be nothing more than an advisory opinion ; therefore, it dismissed the suit for failing to present a "case or controversy ", as required by Article III of the United States Constitution .

Later developments

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: Later developments")
]

Although this decision remains as valid case law, its effective precedent has been diminished by the Supreme Court's approval of the declaratory judgment act, which permits a party to seek a declaration of rights against another party, even where no affirmative relief (e.g. damages or an injunction) is being sought. In a declaratory judgment action, if under the facts as proved, there is some possibility of a future need for relief as among the parties, a declaratory judgment may be entered.

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&action=edit&section=5 "Edit section: References")
]

↑ Muskrat v. United States, 219 U.S. 346 (1911).

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&action=edit&section=6 "Edit section: External links")
]

Works related to Muskrat v. United States at Wikisource
Text of Muskrat v. United States, 219 U.S. 346 (1911) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Library of Congress

U.S. Supreme Court Article III case law

Federalism

Justiciability

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Muskrat_v._United_States&oldid=1351327637 "

Categories :

Hidden categories:

Muskrat v. United States

1 language Add topic

Editorial context from Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA 4.0).

Judges: Day

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.