Opportunities in communities big and small. Charter is connecting us. Charter communications supports cspan as a Public Service alg with these other Television Providers giving you a front row seat to democracy. Principal chief testifies at a congressional hearing examining the procedural steps needed to have a Cherokee Nation delegate to become a member of the house of representatives. This runs about two hours. The rules committee will come to order. Americas history with the Indigenous People that are native to this land is atrocious. Theres no other way to put it. Its appalling. Thankfully its becoming common to acknowledge this publicly whether that means recognizing native American Heritage month or pointing out that this capital is built on the stolen landnd of people who lived along the Potomac River long before this country existed. But the truth is that simply acknowledging this truth is not enough. Words alone dont absolve off of the injustices brought on the communities at the hands of the u. S. Government. That is why im hopeful todays historic hearing opens a new door towards building a greater greaterunderstanding and the poe inclusion of these communities. 1835 the u. S. Government and individuals from the Cherokee Nation negotiated the treaty in agreement with the government that was ratified by the United States senate. The treaty which led to the removal of the cherokeee from their homelands included a provision that says the Cherokee Nation shall be entitled to a delegate in the house of representatives of the United States whenever Congress Shall make provisions for theov same. Its been nearly 200 years but i am proud of that this committee on this day at this hearing is exploring options and the potential implementation of seating it Cherokee Nation delegate. This is a complicated issue which is why we have experts with us today to help answer questions and help find a way to move forward. Several other tribes have also come forward to say that they are entitled to a delegate as well so while the conversations we are having pertain solely to the Cherokee Nation, we know more work will have to be done to examine this issue further. I believe we need to find a way to broaden the obligations even though it will be a potentially challenging road to get there but we need to honor those delegations and congress should find a way to make it happen. Now let mepo turn to the Ranking Member, member of the nation of oklahoma and one of only a few native americans serving in congress right now for his remarks. Im proud to serve alongside of him every day but especially today as he helps this institution navigate this important issue. Thanbly some days more others, but this is a a good day and i want to thank you very much and thank my friend for being here. We are here today for the jurisdiction hearing examining the legal and procedural factors related to seating a delegate Cherokee Nation in the house of representatives. Before i continue my remarks i wantnt to personally thank you r holding this hearing today. Im hopeful that the discussions we have t today helped lay the groundwork for other committees and jurisdictions to examine this issue in more detail. Regardless, today marks an important first step to examine the questions and the process throughout the seating of a delegate from the Cherokee Nation. As a member of the chickasaw nation of the culture of the congressional native american caucus, im always voiced my support for the federal government to honor its treaty obligation. Far too often, excuse me, for far too long in our nations history, the federal government accumulated a record of making promises to tribes and then breaking those promises as soon as it was expedient to do so. Only in recent years as the record improved. With todays hearing we begin examination of a specific promise made in the treaty in 1835. And ico certainly welcome the examination of the question by congress. But it seems clear from the language of the treaty that this is not a selfexecuting and would require action by congress to implement. As we consider this, members of the house have real questions about this issue, and the purpose of todays hearing is to begin examining those questions inco detail. In addition to basic procedural questions, these questions will include other tribes that have this right, why does the tribe choose toch selected the delicae rather thanti by voting the tri. Are there concerns about the double representation resulting in constituents being represented to vote by their geographic member of congress and by delegates from the tribe . Is this arrangement constitutional and if so what factors must be considered. How would the seating of a delegate change the character of a house if at all and many more. I list these questions for the witnesses to discuss along with others that will assuredly come up during todays hearing. Its important to note the right contained in the treaty may be clear but the resolution of those rights and how they may be applied still require a great examination and consideration. If the house ultimately decides to move forward, it will only do so after a bipartisan recognition of the claim. A bipartisan process going forward. We should remember that the Cherokee Nation is in the only tribe that that he may have this right into the process will be followed for this claim may apply to others as well. Im glad toe see tribes with suh conviction and todays hearing represents a starting point in that bipartisan process recognizing tribal treaty rights. However additional work and considerationon is needed particularly by the other committees of jurisdiction. I hope the work we have done here today continues to carry the process forward. Ideally examining all such claims by tribes who possess them. Finally i wish to clean up a common misunderstanding about the nature of todays hearing that ive seen reported in the media. Its a hearing to give congress an opportunity toth understand e issue of seating a delegate to represent the Cherokee Nation. No vote on that issue today indeed at present no legislation has been introduced on this issue. Todays hearing is a good first step but we have a long way to go in the process and indeed until the legislation is proposed into the issue is taken up by the committees of the original jurisdiction, congress is not to act. I think the witnesses for appearing before us today. I look forward to the testimony and with that i will yield back. Sei think the Ranking Member fors his Opening Statement and now introduce the distinguished witnesses, chuck hoskin junior serves as the principal chief of the Cherokee Nation. Prior to being elected in 2019, he was the Cherokee Nations secretary of state and also served as a member of the council of the Cherokee Nation. The professor at the university of Oklahoma College of law and theok law center he teaches classes in federal law, constitutional law and International Peoples law among other topics. Schwartz is a legislative attorney in the American Law Division of Congressional Research. In that capacity providing constitutional analysis to congress on a range of matters including federal indian law and Congressional Authority over the United States territories. We are delighted that all three of you areis here and we will begin with you chief hoskin. Just make sure your light is on. Chair a man, Ranking Member d distinguished members of the committee i bring you greetings from the Cherokee Nation reservation. Go into my remarks i want to acknowledge representatives of our government other than myself here today. We have the speaker of the council of theio cherokee natio, councilman keith alston, a member of my cabinet is here and of course our delegate in the United States house of representatives. That you areored all here. This is a historic day for the Cherokee Nation and for the United States. We are reexamining something critically important in the United States and to Cherokee Nation and i think you for holding the hearing. I speak to you today on behalf of not only the more than 440,000 citizens of the Cherokee Nation but millions of cherokee citizens that have waited for this day to come since 1835. This morning we will examine a promise made to the Cherokee Nation in the treaty in 1835. This was the agreement that directly led to the death of thousands of cherokees on the trail of tears. The Cherokee Nation conveyed the entirety of the lands east of the mississippi about hi7 million acres to the United States in exchange the government of the United States made certain promises. One of those was that it is stipulated that the Cherokee Nation shall be entitled to a delegate in the house of representatives of the United States whenever Congress Shall make provisions of the same. Article seven of the treaty. The carefully constructed promise found in that article was in fact critical to secure the agreement of the cherokee people. Quote, the indians will never approve that bill without the delegate. That was from a negotiator from the cherokees john ridge. Quote, if you fail to obtain for us the right of being heard on the floor of congress by our delegates, led to the bill parrish here. The bill didu not perish. The federal government agreed to the delegate. The parties entered into the treatye. And the senate of the United States ratified the treaty. The right to a delegate was brought forward in our last treaty with the United States in 1866 and remains the supreme law ofof the land. The Cherokee Nation and the Cherokee Nation alone is the tribe that is the party to the treaty and to the treaty of 1866. Cherokee nation has in fact adhered to our obligations under these treaties. I am here to ask the United States to do the same. Its time for this body to honor this promise and see our delegate in the house of representatives. No barrier, constitutional or otherwise, prevents this. As you consider this issue, i believe its important that you remember the following. First the treaty is a new ,loving, valid treaty and the delegate provision is intact. A lapse of time cannot aggregate a treaty. That is settled law to aggregate a Treaty Congress must do so expressly and clearly and it is not done so here. Article seven uses classic mandatory language that creates the right for the Cherokee Nation ande imposes a deep duty on the United States. It uses the word shall, terms stipulated and entitled. This right is to the Cherokee Nation. Seating the delegate wouldnt open up the floodgates to other tribes seeking their own representation. Only three tribal treaty is contemplate aa voice in the houe of representatives. Of these, they write in the treaty by far the clearest. Fairness as always is important, but denying the Cherokee Nation and our right to a delegate simply because this isnt the universal rights shared by all tribes is not fairness. Our ancestors prioritized this right in the negotiation ofa te treaty. We had no right to claim the treaty of other tribes. They had no right to claim ours. Concerns over dual representation have been voiced when they are not warranted. Its well settled since the founding era that the term representative in the rrconstitutional sense requires that the representative had a vote on the house floor for final passage. A delegate in this body had no such right. Indian treaties unlike International Treaties are self executed and the Congressional Research service asks whether this treaty right is selfexecuting but crs points to cases with International Treaty and there is a distinction. I acknowledge the Supreme Court has repeatedly concluded that an International Treaty must be domesticated through a federal statute. However, indian treaties are inherently domesticated. All of the casesna that have considered this have held indian treaties are selfexecuting. And mr. Chairman, i would point to the committee to the 1986 Supreme Court case. The court to summed it up this way. The s government has simply faid to counter the argument that no case has ever held an indian treaty to be nonself executed. The house has ample authority to unilaterally seat a treaty back to Cherokee Nation delegate. Under the constitution supremacy clause, treaties and statutes created the supreme law. Since the treaty established the delegate position there is no need for a separate statute to create the delegate position. This would render the rights and article seven of the treaty meetings. We agree with the crs by adjusting its standing rules in the house resolution. The tribal organizations in the tribal citizens across the country strongly support our effort. Fulfillingtr this promise woulde a historic victory for the treaty rights and sovereignty. The treaty requires the house to seat the delegate. I am a proud citizen of the Cherokee Nation. I have Great Respect for the United States house of representatives. Because oferic all of this, it y firm belief and expectation that the house of representatives will take swifts action to seat the delegate in congress, honor our treaty rightss and therefore make the United States good on its promise to our cherokee ancestors. Thank you and im happy to answer any questions. Thank you very much for your powerful testimony. I now would like to turn to professor robertson you are recognized for your testimony. Good morning, charlie and mike govern, Ranking Member and members ofnguished the committee. My name is Lindsay Robertson and as the chairman mentioned, im a professor at the university of Oklahoma College of law and university visiting scholar at the indigenous uc hastings college. Ive been the professor of federal indian law for more than 30 years and taught constitutional law for more than 25. From 2000 to 2010 i served as a special counsel of in the universe for oklahoma governors. It is an honor to have been invited to address the committee on this important topic. My role today is to provide an overview of federal indian law for those Committee Members for whom the field is not familiar. Tribal governments in the Unitef States are both pre constitutional and extraconstitutional. That is they existed before european settlement and operate apart from and not directly subject to the constitution. Thee power of the tribal governments exercise is inherent, not delegated by the United States. Federal indian law deals in large measure with sorting out which sovereign federal state has jurisdiction over activities that occur within tribal lands which the u. S. Calls Indian Country. The United States recognizes more than 500 tribal nations all of which the Supreme Court has characterized as domestic dependent nations. Nationsib and not simply aggregations of individuals sharing a particular heritage, but domestic nations not to foreign nations and therefore having a special relationship with the United States. In the same decision in which it recognized the tribes as domestic dependent nations, Cherokee Nation versus georgia in 1831 the court described that relationship as being like that of a word to his guardian. In 1886 the court recognized the substantive legal consequence to this relationship. As guardian or trustee the United States has power to legislate over Indian Affairs but also the responsibility to exercise that power to the ultimate benefit of the tribes. During most of the century following the British Co