Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Kneip’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

19 federal appellate · 5 district · 8 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) Congressional intent is controlling. (2) Doubtful or ambiguous expressions are to be resolved in favor of the Indians. (3) Opening a reservation for settlement does not necessarily mean that the opened area loses its reservation status. (4) The canon of construction requiring that doubtful expressions are to be construed in favor of the Indians, does not require a determination that reservation status survives congressionally manifested intent to the contrary. (5) In order to ascertain congressional intent, a court is obliged to look at the Act in question, the surrounding circumstances and the legislative history-”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. White Horse · 453 F. Supp. 1171 - United States v. Juvenile

2. “The language employed, “cede, surrender, grant and convey” leaves no doubt as to its meaning. There is a complete relinquishment of right, title, and claim. “It would be impossible,” we have held of the words “ceded, conveyed, transferred, relinquished and surrendered,” to select words operating more completely to extinguish every vestige of Indian title, and releasing the government more absolutely from every obligation, moral as well as legal.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Hero · State v. Thompson

3. ““SEC. 7. That sections sixteen and thirty-six of the land in each township within the tract described in section one of this Act shall not be subject to entry, but shall be reserved for the use of the common schools and paid for by the United States at one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre, and the same are hereby granted to the States of South Dakota and North Dakota for such purpose as the same are located in the said States respectively; and in case any of said sections, or parts thereof, are lost to said States by reason of allotments thereof to any Indian or Indians, or otherwise, the governors of said States, respectively, with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, are hereby authorized, within the area in the respective States described in section one of this Act, to locate other lands not occupied not exceeding two sections in any one township, which shall be paid for by the United States as herein provided, in quantity equal to the loss, and such selections shall be made prior to the opening of such lands to settlement. “SEC. 8. That there is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, the sum of not more than two hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to pay for the lands granted to the States of South Dakota and North Dakota, as provided in section seven of this Act. And there is hereby appropriated the further sum of seventy-five thousand dollars, or so much thereof as ma”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Stankey v. Waddell