Cooperation without Submission: Indigenous Jurisdictions in Native Nation–US Engagements (Chicago Series in Law and Society)

**A meticulous and thought-provoking look at how Tribes use language to engage in "cooperation without submission."** It is well-known that there is a complicated relationship between Native American Tribes and the US government. Relations between Tribes and the federal government are dominated by the principle that the government is supposed to engage in meaningful consultations with the tribes about issues that affect them. In __Cooperation without Submission__, Justin B. Richland, an associate justice of the Hopi Appellate Court and ethnographer, closely examines the language employed by both Tribes and government agencies in over eighty hours of meetings between the two. Richland shows how Tribes conduct these meetings using language that demonstrates their commitment to nation-to-nation interdependency, while federal agents appear to approach these consultations with the assumption that federal law is supreme and ultimately authoritative. In other words, Native American Tribes see themselves as nations with some degree of independence, entitled to recognition of their sovereignty over Tribal lands, while the federal government acts to limit that authority. In this vital book, Richland sheds light on the ways the Tribes use their language to engage in “cooperation without submission.” "Justin B. Richland continues his study of the relationship between American law and government and Native American law and tribal governance in his new manuscript Cooperation without Submission: Indigenous Jurisdictions in Native Nation-US Engagements. Richland looks at the way Native Americans and government officials talk about their relationship and seek to resolve conflicts over the extent of Native American authority in tribal lands when it conflicts with federal law and policy. The American federal government is supposed to engage in meaningful consultations with the tribes about issues that affect the tribes under long standing Federal law which accorded the federal government the responsibility of a trustee to the tribes. It requires the government to act in the best interest of the tribes and to interpret agreements with tribes in a way that respects their rights and interests. At least partly based on a patronizing view of Native Americans, the law has also sought to protect the interests of the tribes from those who might take advantage of them. In Cooperation without Submission, Richland looks closely at the language employed by both sides in consultations between tribes and government agencies focusing on the Hopi tribe but also discussing other cases. Richland shows how tribes conduct these meetings using language that demonstrates their commitment to nation-to-nation interdependency, while federal agents appear to approach these consultations with the assumption that federal law is supreme and ultimately authoritative"-- Provided by publisher Contents 8 List of Figures 10 A Note about Transcripts, Orthography, and Terminology 12 Part 1. Introduction 14 1. Cooperation without Submission 16 2. Beyond Dialogue: A Brief History of Native-US Engagement 48 Part 2. Hopi Juris-diction 96 3. CWS: A Hopi Sociopolitical Theory of Knowing, Relating, and Norming 98 4. Juris-dictions of Significance: CWS in a Hopi-US Engagement 126 Part 3. Making Indigenous Juris-diction Unrecognizable 150 5. Perils of Engagement and Failures of Federal Acknowledgment 152 6. Taxing Relations: Indigenous Juris-diction and the Tribal Tax Status Act 175 Part 4. Conclusion 206 7. Standing with Indigenous Juris-dictions 208 Acknowledgments 216 References 222 Index 234 It is well-known that there is a complicated relationship between Native American Tribes and the US government. Relations between Tribes and the federal government are dominated by the principle that the government is supposed to engage in meaningful consultations with the tribes about issues that affect them. In this book, Justin B. Richland, an associate justice of the Hopi Appellate Court and ethnographer, closely examines the language employed by both Tribes and government agencies in over eighty hours of meetings between the two