The Indian Claim Restriction Act 1982 (ICLA) is a United States federal law on restrictions that govern some types of claims by Native Americans and claims by the federal government on behalf of a tribe.
Video Indian Claims Limitations Act
Statuta sebelumnya
The previous restraining laws only apply to the suit by non-Indian landowners against the federal government.
Congress passed the first restrictive law applicable to Native American land claims in 1966. The limitation was six years for contract claims and offenses, and three years for claims of claims. There is no limit to claiming land rights. The pre-1966 claims were deemed to have been promulgated on July 18, 1966, the date of the passage of time.
Under the law of 1966, claims of infringement prior to 1966 would be prohibited on July 18, 1972. On that day, Congress extended the limitation period for additional five-year pre-1966 claims, until July 18, 1977. The 1972 action also expanded the scope of application of restrictions , for all civil actions carried by Indian or individual individuals based on contract, error, or theory violation.
Under the 1972 action, the pre-1966 claim offense would become banned in 1977. That year, Congress extended the period of restrictions again, until April 1, 1980.
Under the law of 1977, the pre-1966 fraud claim will become a parred on April 1, 1980. Four days before the deadline, Congress extended the restriction period until December 31, 1982. The act required the Secretary of the Interior to determine which claims should not will be prosecuted, and submitted a proposal to settle the claim legislatively on June 30, 1981. The secretary submitted a zero proposal on this deadline, but identified 17,000 pre-1962 claims in 1982.
Maps Indian Claims Limitations Act
Legislative history
In 1982, for the first time, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Justice failed to support the extension. The Native American Rights Fund (NARF) initiated a class action lawsuit on behalf of all Indians and tribes with pre-1966 claims. On November 17, 1982, the NARF obtained an order requiring the government to submit a legislative proposal within 30 days or to commence the 17,000 lawsuits themselves before the law ended. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia decision looks great in Congressional debates.
A day before a pre-1966 claim would be banned, Congress extended the deadline for the last time. This eliminates the full restriction laws for some types of claims.
Terms and interpretations
The 1982 Indian Limitations Restriction Act requires the Secretary of the Interior to publish within the Federal Register, within 90 days, identify all pre-1966 claims, identify which pre-1966 claims are potentially laudable, and identify which claims suitable for litigation or legislation; Further, Indians and individuals were given 180 days later to comment on the Secretary's findings. The secretary does so, and modifies the list in response to comments. The pre-1966 claim restriction status depends in part on the list:
- Excluded claims from both lists ended on January 6, 1984;
- Claims on both lists but not deemed suitable for litigation or legislation expiring on 7 November 1984;
- Claims on any list and identified as appropriate for legislation expire three years after the submission of legislation or legislative report;
- Claims on any list and deemed appropriate for litigation are exempt from any statute of limitations, unless declared by the Secretary, in which case they are forbidden one year from the publication of the deletion;
Other claim status does not depend on this list:
- Claims of quiet titles are not affected by the Law. The Supreme Court has stated that the provisions of the 12-year law separate from the restrictions contained in the Laws of Tendency shall apply to the action by the underwriters under the Act.
- Claims against the federal government are not affected by the Law.
- Post-1966 claims are not affected by the Law.
According to Oneida County v. Oneida Indian Nation of NY State (1985) ["Oneida II"], the 1982 Law "for the first time imposed restrictions on certain tort and contract claims for damages carried by the tribes Indian and Indian individuals. " Oneida II , consider the Law, observing:" The [T] legal framework adopted in 1982 presupposes the right of India's action not subject to the law of restrictions. it becomes a violation of the Congress' to us to argue that the state law of the period of restriction must be borrowed in this state. "Claims involved in Oneida II are included in the first list, though it is unnecessary because Oneida lawsuit was filed in 1970, before the law.
In Cayuga Indian Nation of N.Y. v. Pataki (2005), where Second Circuit states that the laches bar of all aboriginal title claims are heard in throws or offenses, Cayuga's claim is on the supplementary list.
Home Affairs List
The initial list of the Department of the Interior is 222 pages.
The initial list contains more than 17,000 claims by the watchman associated with the White Earth Indian Reservation in Minnesota, totaling over 100,000 hectares. The Congress responded with the Land of Order White Land Settlement Act (1986).
Note
References
- Diane Kiesel, Indian, Congress Spar Over Land Claims Bill, 68 A.B.A.J. 529 (1982).
- LeAnn Larson LeFave, Forced Claim Cost South Dakota Indian Land: Will Landowners Be Responsible for Government Mistakes ?, 30 S.D. L. Rev. 59, 70-77 (1984).
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments