St. Regis Mohawk Tribe hoping for land claim settlement, rather than more litigation

In a land claim dispute that has been ongoing for decades, U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence E. Kahn recently ruled that all transfers of reservation land to New York state after 1796 violated the 1790 Indian Nonintercourse Act. The 1790 federal legislation says Native American reservation land cannot be sold without an act of Congress. The Triangle is distinct on maps showing boundaries within Franklin County, jutting to the northwest of the otherwise square-shaped town of Bombay.

The tribe will now seek a remedy on the judge’s ruling that its claim to the land within the triangle is valid.

“We will likely pursue an agreement, which we have been working on for years. But the terms should better reflect the court’s ruling. It is likely that the state and counties will need time to fully understand the meaning of the ruling. They might be in denial right now. If we cannot reach a settlement, we have alternative options such as litigation and taking land into trust,” the FAQ document reads.

In the document, tribal officials refer to the issue of New York state and Franklin County levying taxes on tribe members within the Triangle as “the big one.”

“We have not examined all of the impacts yet but it does mean that all of the arguments we have been making, for example, about taxes, are correct. As of now, there is no basis for the state or county to impose property taxes or income taxes in the Triangle. This ruling would apply to all land set aside by the treaty. There will be other aspects of this in terms of authority or power that have to be examined but taxes is the big one,” the document reads.

Another legal issue the tribe hopes to resolve is foreclosure proceedings initiated against tribe members within the land claim areas.

“The tribe is working on how to address the foreclosures through the court case. So, for now, things will remain the same. We expect to get relief for tribal members whose properties have been foreclosed,” the document reads. “If you are living within the boundaries of the 1796 Treaty, you have an argument that your property is exempt from taxes under state law. You have two options. Pay the taxes under protest or do not pay the taxes and argue your property is tax exempt under state law. To do so, you would have to file a grievance with the local town assessor. However, note that if you are within any area but the Triangle, the assessor may deny your request for exemption.”

The document adds that “the court’s decision was very good for the tribe and will very likely clear up some these questions that will benefit tribal members. However, the decision is not a final decision yet. It could be appealed. And we still have to wait until Judge Kahn decides the ‘remedy’ phase of the case. Until that happens we cannot give definitive answers.”

The ruling does not concern federal income taxes, according to the FAQ.

There are other land claim areas besides the Triangle, including a square mile in each of the towns of Fort Covington and Massena, another 5,000 acres in Fort Covington, an area referred to as the Grasse River Meadows and Barnhart, Croil and Long Sault islands on the St. Lawrence River. The tribal FAQ document says prior court rulings have largely shot down those land claims on what’s called a laches (pronounced “latches”) argument. The FAQ defines laches as, “a legal doctrine that allows the court to deny a remedy if the claim will upset ‘settled expectations’ of the surrounding community.”

“Those (earlier land claim) rulings are appealable at the end of the case. But since the Second Circuit Court of Appeals is the court that dismissed all of the other land claims in New York on laches grounds, we do not believe the Court of Appeals would allow those claims to go forward having already been dismissed,” the document reads. “The state and county will likely argue the tribe is not entitled to … title to the land but should only receive a monetary judgment. The court has already held that the Triangle is not like other land claims and that laches did not apply to the claim. We believe there is an argument that laches should not apply to the remedy either and that title should be returned to the tribe. It will come down to whether the court would be willing to award the tribe title to all the land in the Triangle.”

What makes the Triangle unique is the supermajority of Native Americans residing there. In an earlier statement to the Times, St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Council said that area “is conservatively over 90% Mohawk-owned and occupied and there are numerous businesses located there.” The tribe believes that only 1% of the land in the Triangle is owned by non-Natives.

With regard to the other land claim areas, the tribe says although it may not get back title to those areas, it could retain the 1796 reservation boundaries, citing the 2020 Supreme Court case McGirt v. Oklahoma. In that case, the justices ruled that much of eastern Oklahoma remains within the reservation boundaries prior to 1906, because those boundaries were never disestablished by an act of Congress.

“The Court ruled that these areas are still within the 1796 reservation boundaries. This is important. The tribe’s claim in for loss of title may have been barred because of laches but that does not impact the boundary,” the FAQ document reads. “The McGirt case in Oklahoma is a good example. Most of the land in Oklahoma is owned by non-Indians. That does not mean the tribe lost its reservation. It just means non-Indians live in it.”

The St. Regis Mohawk Tribal Council, which is made up of three chiefs and three sub-chiefs, previously told the Times that the tribe will not seek to have non-Natives removed from land claim areas, nor will it attempt to take title to land the tribe may own.

“While title to the other areas will not be returned to the tribe under this ruling, the tribe still has the option of purchasing and taking that land into trust,” the Tribal Council in a statement to the Times last week. “The significance of the district court rulings as to those areas is that the land is now within reservation boundaries. The authority of the tribe in those areas and the applicability of state laws to Mohawks living in those areas will have to be worked out.”