THE DOCTRINE OF CHRISTIAN DISCOVERY AND DOMINATION: HOW IT HAS BEEN USED BY UNITED STATES COURTS TO DENY TREATY RIGHTS & DISMISS THE HAUDENOSAUNEE LAND RIGHTS CASES.
This article examines how the doctrine of Christian discovery and domination continues to serve as the foundational legal justification used by United States courts to deny treaty rights and dismiss Indigenous land rights claims, with particular focus on Haudenosaunee nations. Centering the Supreme...
| Publicado en: | Journal for Cultural & Religious Theory Vol. 25; no. 1; pp. 46 - 56 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Whitestone Foundation
Spring2026
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=193453978&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 193453978 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 15305228 1CSJ jtl: Journal for Cultural & Religious Theory issn: 15305228 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Spring2026 vid: 25 iid: 1 pid: 24534 pub: Whitestone Foundation artinfo: ui: 193453978 ppf: 46 ppct: 10 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 977KB tig: atl: THE DOCTRINE OF CHRISTIAN DISCOVERY AND DOMINATION: HOW IT HAS BEEN USED BY UNITED STATES COURTS TO DENY TREATY RIGHTS & DISMISS THE HAUDENOSAUNEE LAND RIGHTS CASES. aug: au: HEATH, JOSEPH J. affil: Onondaga Nation General Counsel su: Johnson v. M'Intosh Haudenosaunee (North American people) Tribal sovereignty Legal doctrines Marshall, John, 1755-1835 Legal rights United States. Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) State courts Indigenous rights United States. Supreme Court Appellate courts Oneida (N.Y.) United States New York (State) sug: subj: Oneida (N.Y.) United States New York (State) Johnson v. M'Intosh Haudenosaunee (North American people) Tribal sovereignty Legal doctrines Marshall, John, 1755-1835 Legal rights United States. Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) State courts Indigenous rights United States. Supreme Court Appellate courts keyword: ancestral land and treaty enforcement Christian discovery Christian domination colonization European claims Indigenous land Indigenous land reclamation Indigenous land rights land justice racial equality treaty rights ab: This article examines how the doctrine of Christian discovery and domination continues to serve as the foundational legal justification used by United States courts to deny treaty rights and dismiss Indigenous land rights claims, with particular focus on Haudenosaunee nations. Centering the Supreme Court's decision in City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation (2005), the article critiques the Court's revival of colonial doctrine through a fabricated "equitable" defense mislabeled as laches. It traces Sherrill's jurisprudential roots to Johnson v. M'Intosh (1823), where Chief Justice John Marshall embedded Christian European claims of domination into United States law as a mechanism for Indigenous dispossession. The article analyzes how the Second Circuit quickly dismissed the Cayuga, Oneida, and Onondaga land rights actions, despite undisputed treaty violations, constitutional breaches, and illegal land takings by New York State. These decisions reveal the creation of a distinct and shifting set of equitable rules applied only to Indigenous land claims, consistently privileging settler expectations over Indigenous sovereignty and justice. Beyond domestic litigation, the article addresses the Onondaga Nation's turn to international human rights forums, including its successful petition before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, and highlights the recent return of 1,000 acres of ancestral land as evidence that land justice is neither disruptive nor impractical. The article concludes by urging Indigenous law practitioners to directly confront and demand repudiation of the doctrine of Christian discovery, reaffirming treaty supremacy and international human rights as essential foundations for justice and healing. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Journal for Cultural & Religious Theory is the property of Whitestone Foundation and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Journal for Cultural & Religious Theory holder: Whitestone Foundation dt: @attributes: year: 2026 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|