Hearings to examine S.107, to amend the Lumbee Act of 1956.

2025-11-05

Summary

This meeting of the Committee on Indian Affairs convened to discuss S107, the Lumbee Fairness Act, which seeks full federal recognition for the Lumbee Tribe of North Carolina.[ 00:21:16 ] The discussion centered on whether recognition should occur through direct congressional action or the administrative process of the Department of Interior, with witnesses presenting arguments for and against the proposed legislative pathway.[ 00:22:12 ]

Themes

Lumbee Federal Recognition and Pathways

The Lumbee Fairness Act, S107, represents the latest effort in the Lumbee Tribe's over 120-year quest for full federal recognition.[ 00:21:19 ] An identical bill passed the House of Representatives, and both President Trump and President Biden have expressed support for the Lumbee's recognition.[ 00:21:43 ] Federal recognition establishes a government-to-government relationship, creates fiduciary trust responsibilities, and grants eligibility for special programs and services, affirming tribal sovereignty and opening economic opportunities. Federal recognition can be achieved through the Department of Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement (OFA) or by direct congressional action.[ 00:22:12 ]

Arguments for Congressional Recognition

Senator Tillis highlighted the overwhelming, bipartisan support for the bill from various political figures and over 235 federally recognized tribes, emphasizing that "fairness for the Lumbee tribe isn't partisan, it's simply the right thing to do." The Lumbee were recognized by the state of North Carolina in 1885 and have sought federal recognition since 1888. The 1956 Lumbee Act acknowledged the tribe but "cruelly denied" them federal benefits, a policy dating back to the termination era, creating a "legal limbo" that only Congress can resolve. Congress holds constitutional authority to recognize tribes, and legislative recognition is a well-established precedent, having recognized more tribes than the administrative process since 1978.[ 00:22:33 ] Chairman Lowry shared the Lumbee's history of resilience, including fighting against the Confederate Home Guard and successfully confronting the Ku Klux Klan in 1958, underscoring their "patriotism and love of a country that defines us as a people." Attorney Arlinda Locklear argued that the Lumbee meet the Supreme Court's definition of an Indian tribe based on their community, shared identity, and historical leadership, supported by a "richest record that exists for any non-federally recognized tribe in this country." She asserted that congressional action is necessary to achieve a "final and conclusive" resolution, avoiding decades of administrative delays and potential lawsuits that would prolong the injustice.

Arguments Against Congressional Recognition

Chief Michell Hicks of the Eastern Band of the Cherokee Indians and Chief Ben Barnes of the Shawnee Tribe argued that the Lumbee should go through the Office of Federal Acknowledgement (OFA) process, emphasizing the need for "evidence, documentation, and the integrity of federal recognition process." Chief Hicks stated that the Lumbee have historically cycled through various identities without verifiable genealogy or documented continuous tribal existence from a historical tribe, citing a significant increase in self-identification as Indian coinciding with access to a separate school system. Chief Barnes warned against "manufacturing" tribes through political means rather than documented history, asserting that "sovereignty is the inheritance of survivor, not the reward for claiming it." He also cited instances where individuals later identified as Lumbee were initially rejected from Carlisle Indian Industrial School for not meeting the federal definition of Indian, only admitted after "falsely" claiming Cherokee identity. Both chiefs suggested the OFA possesses the necessary expertise to evaluate complex historical claims, and Chief Hicks offered to support an expedited administrative process for the Lumbee.

Congressional Authority and Debate on Process Integrity

There was a robust discussion on the nature of congressional authority in federal recognition. Senator Murkowski and Vice Chairman Schatz affirmed Congress's broad and plenary constitutional authority over Indian affairs, including the power to directly recognize tribes by statute. Senator Schatz specifically argued that the Department of Interior has "screwed this up for generation after generation," and that Congress's authority is not contingent on the administrative process, especially given historical policies of assimilation and termination that harmed tribes.[ 01:14:35 ]

Opponents, however, stressed that while Congress has the authority, the administrative process provides an "evidence-based approach" critical for maintaining the integrity of tribal sovereignty and federal law.

Cost Implications

Concerns about the financial implications of federal recognition were raised, with Chief Hicks citing independent analyses suggesting costs in the billions over five years, potentially diverting treaty-based resources from currently recognized tribes. Senator Schatz acknowledged that increasing the number of recognized individuals would necessitate increased funding for federal services like IHS, BIE, and BIA.[ 01:11:27-01:11:41 ]

Supporters countered that Congress has the power to appropriate funds and can increase funding to accommodate new tribes without impacting existing ones.

Tone of the Meeting

The tone of the meeting was largely respectful, despite significant disagreements and deeply held convictions on both sides. Speakers expressed passion and emotion, particularly Senator Mullin, Chairman Lowry, and Chief Barnes, underscoring the personal and historical weight of federal recognition. The committee maintained a deliberative approach, examining historical records, legal precedents, and practical implications. There was evident frustration from Chairman Lowry regarding the protracted nature of the administrative recognition process, which he argued could take decades and lead to further litigation. Opposing tribes consistently emphasized the importance of maintaining the integrity and evidentiary standards of the federal recognition process.

Participants

Transcript

Lisa A. Murkowski

Good afternoon. The committee will come to order. On our agenda this afternoon is one bill. This is S107, the Lumbee Fairness Act. It's introduced by our friend and colleague, Senator Tom Tillis. This bill represents the latest effort in the Lumbee Tribe's more than 120-year quest for full federal recognition. An identical companion measure passed the House of Representatives earlier this year. It's been incorporated as an amendment into the House version of the National Defense Authorization Act. President Trump has also expressed support for federal recognition of the Lumbee tribe. In a presidential memorandum, he declared it, quote, the policy of the United States to support full federal recognition of the Lumbee tribe of North Carolina, including granting the tribe eligibility to receive all associated federal benefits. So, once again, it's the Senate's turn to take a closer look. This committee has had a long history of examining and debating the federal recognition process for tribes, including whether recognition should occur through the administrative process at the Department of Interior's Office of Federal Acknowledgement under Part 83, or through direct congressional action. Our committee has also heard arguments that favor and oppose Lumbee going through the administrative process at Interior under Part 83 versus the congressional legislative recognition process. So today's hearing continues that work with respect to the Lumbee tribe. I think it's important to remember that Congress has never given up its constitutional authority to decide whether a group constitutes a tribe. As recently as 2019, Congress granted full federal recognition to four tribes through passage of the NDAA. And since 1978, when the Interior established its administrative process, Congress has recognized at least 39 tribes.

Lisa A. Murkowski

So this is serious work. and it's work that I take seriously both as a senator and as chairman of this committee. Full federal recognition establishes a government-to-government relationship between the United States and the tribe, and it also creates a fiduciary trust responsibility on the part of the federal government to the tribe and to its members. Recognition makes a tribe eligible for the special programs and services the United States provides to Native peoples because of their status as Indians. It also affirms important elements of tribal sovereignty, the ability to govern their own affairs, to tax, to establish a tribal court system, and to exercise limited immunity from certain state and local laws. Federal recognition can also open the door to specific economic opportunities including the ability to conduct gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. We have a full panel of witnesses with us today, and I'm looking forward to hearing from them. However, it is notable that no representative from the administration is present. We did extend an invitation to the Department of Interior, but due to the ongoing government shutdown, the department declined to testify in person. The department has submitted written testimony, which will be made part of the hearing record and posted on the committee's website alongside the rest of our written submissions. And so with that, I'll turn to Vice Chairman Schatz for his introductory remarks.

Brian Emanuel Schatz

Thank you. Thank you, Chair Murkowski, for calling today's hearing on the Lumbee Fairness Act. Congress's authority over Indian affairs is broad. It is enshrined in the Constitution and it is plenary. One of our most sacred duties in the exercise of this authority is federal acknowledgement. We do this by either delegating our power to the executive or directly recognizing tribes by statute. Either way, federal recognition forms the basis for a tribal government to government relationship with the United States that is political in nature and incredibly powerful. To put this congressional power into historical context, until 1871, the United States carried out its Indian policy through treaty negotiations. Treaty making was replaced in favor of the legislative process that we use today. Over 150 years, Congress has federally recognized just 39 tribes. So it's especially poignant that since 1888, Congress has considered dozens of bills related to the Lumbee tribe and our federal obligations to them. The majority have been on Lumbee recognition alone, including Senator Tillis' S-107, bipartisan legislation that I am a co-sponsor of. The House of Representatives has passed several Lumbee recognition bills, and the Senate has had multiple hearings over several decades. We're here today to continue to build on that record. Each time we have a hearing on federal recognition for the Lumbee tribe, we learn more. This is a deliberative process, as it should be. Federal recognition of a government-to-government relationship between sovereigns is rare, and that's because no aspect of congressional power over Indian affairs is greater than our ability to recognize tribal relations with the United States. Thank you to our witnesses for being here today, and I look forward to your testimony and the opportunity to add to the record.

Sign up for free to see the full transcript

Accounts help us prevent bots from abusing our site. Accounts are free and will allow you to access the full transcript.