Hatton W. Sumners Institute

Description

The institute is divided into three levels, as follows:

101: This 40-hour training begins with an in-depth study of the Declaration of Independence. Participants will then be taken through the ancient and European origins of the U.S. Constitution, followed by the American origins. The training will continue with a famous Federalist debating a famous Anti-Federalist over whether a New York State convention should vote to ratify the Constitution in 1788.

Then attending teachers will be taken on a walk through the seven articles of the Constitution. The remainder of the time will be spent studying the First Amendment and famous Supreme Court cases on the First Amendment, including the current term cases.

The agenda is divided into blocks of time spent with scholars, followed by break-out sessions where activities are demonstrated on the curriculum covered in the scholar sessions.

201: Available to those teachers who have completed the 101 session, the advanced session begins with a look at the "Ladder of the Bill of Rights." The remainder of the three-day, 18-hour institute is spent studying Amendments Two through 10, along with Supreme Court cases decided under each of these amendments. Break-out sessions follow each scholar session with activities on the Bill of Rights.

301: The one-day, seven-hour Update Session is available to those teachers who have previously attended both 101 and 201. Participants will spend most of the time discussing Supreme Court cases that have been decided during the past few years with the scholars. They will also receive a new activity guide, which includes lessons on Federalism and writing.

Contact name
Greenwood, Yvonne
Contact email
Sponsoring Organization
Law Focused Education, Inc.
Phone number
800-204-2222
Target Audience
3-12
Start Date
Course Credit
The State Board for Educator Certification approves the institute for continuing education credit for teacher certification, and optional graduate credit is available through the University of St. Thomas in either Political Science or Education.
Contact Title
Coordinator
Duration
Five days
End Date

Lone Wolf v Hitchcock

field_image
Question

Where did the Lone Wolf v Hitchcock case originate, and what did it decide?

Answer

Lone Wolf v Hitchcock (187 U.S. 553, 1903) was part of a long string of treaties and legislative and judicial measures that displaced North America’s First Peoples from their ancestral lands, hemmed them into “reservations,” and eventually detribalized them. This Supreme Court decision originated on the Kiowa-Comanche reservation, which the Medicine Lodge Treaty (1867) had established in Indian Territory. The treaty guaranteed the Kiowa and Comanche “absolute and undisturbed use and occupation” of these reservation lands and stipulated that in order for any portion of the reservation lands to be ceded to the U.S., three-fourths of the adult males in the tribe had to give their approval. However, in 1900, without Native American consent, Congress passed an Allotment Act that divided the Kiowa-Comanche lands into 160-acre allotments to give to the Native American residents of the reservation. Those who accepted the allotments were also given American citizenship. The “surplus” lands left after the allotment were to be sold to whites, and the Kiowa and Comanche were to receive about one dollar per acre for these lands. In 1902, Kiowa headman Lone Wolf sued newly-appointed Secretary of the Interior Ethan Allen Hitchcock to stop the allotment of the Reservation. Lone Wolf argued that the allotment was a denial of due process and a violation of the consent requirement in the Medicine Lodge treaty. The federal government’s lawyers asserted that Congress had a right to alter the terms of the treaty through legislation, because it had paramount authority over Indian affairs. Justice A.C. Bradley of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia rejected the Kiowa claim that the 1900 Act deprived tribes of due process. He stated that lack of consent was not relevant because Native American matters were under the exclusive control of Congress. The Court of Appeals upheld Bradley’s decision, and the United States Supreme Court agreed.

From their very weakness and helplessness. . . there arises the duty of protection, and with it the power

Justice Edward Douglas White’s opinion stated that Congress had the right to alter the terms of treaties with Native American tribes, because “authority over the tribal relations of the Indians has been exercised by Congress from the beginning, and the power has always been deemed a political one.” The judiciary could not interfere in Congress’s “plenary power.” This decision was based on the idea that Indians held dependent status to the United States government. Calling Native Americans “the wards of the nation,” White stated that “from their very weakness and helplessness, so largely due to the course of dealing of the Federal government with them and the treaties in which it has been promised, there arises the duty of protection, and with it the power.” This assertion of paternal dominion over Native Americans reversed the Supreme Court’s acknowledgment of a certain measure of Indian autonomy in previous cases, such as Worcester v Georgia 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) 515 (1832). Shortly after the decision, the U.S. opened Kiowa lands to white settlers, and over 50,000 settled on the “surplus” lands that Kiowa and Comanche had possessed under the Medicine Lodge Treaty. The “plenary power” doctrine first affirmed in Lone Wolf v Hitchcock is still valid Indian policy today.

For more information

Clark, Blue. Lone Wolf v Hitchcock: Treaty Rights and Indian Law at the End of the Nineteenth Century. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1999. Pommersheim, Frank. Broken Landscape: Indians, Indian Tribes, and the Constitution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.

Bibliography

Lone Wolf v Hitchcock 187 U.S. 553 (1903). Treaty with the Kiowa and Comanche (Medicine Lodge Treaty) 1867. In Indian Affairs: Laws and Treaties, vol. 2. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1904. Digital Library, Oklahoma State University.

Race and Place

Image
Annotation

This archive addresses Jim Crow, or racial segregation, laws from the late 1880s until the mid-20th century, focusing on the town of Charlottesville, VA. The theme is the connection of race with place by understanding the lives of African Americans in the segregated South. Political materials includes seven political broadsides and a timeline of African American political activity in Charlottesville and Virginia. Census data includes searchable databases containing information about individual African Americans taken from the 1870 and 1910 Charlottesville census records. City records includes information on individual African Americans and African American businesses. Oral histories includes audio files from over 37 interviews. Personal papers contains indexes to the Benjamin F. Yancey family papers and the letters of Catherine Flanagan Coles. Newspapers, still in progress, includes more than 1,000 transcribed articles from or about Charlottesville or Albemarle from two major African American newspapers—the Charlottesville Recorder and the Richmond Planet. Images has links to two extensive image collections, the Holsinger Studio Collection and the Jackson Davis Collection of African American Educational Photographs, and three smaller collections.

Dred Scott Case

Image
Annotation

The Dred Scott case began in 1846 when slaves Dred and Harriet Scott sued for their freedom, basing their argument on the fact that they had lived in non-slave territories for a number of years. The case ended with the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision of 1857 that not only denied Scott both citizenship and the right to sue in federal court, but ruled that he never had been free and that Congress did not have the right to prohibit slavery in the territories. The decision sparked increased sectional tensions in the years leading to the Civil War. Facsimiles and transcriptions of 85 legal documents relating to the Dred Scott case are provided on this website. The site also provides a chronology and links to 301 Freedom Suits—legal petitions for freedom filed by or on behalf of slaves—in St. Louis courts from 1814 to 1860.

Plymouth Colony Archive Project

Image
Annotation

A wealth of documents and analytical essays emphasize the social history of Plymouth Colony from 1620 to 1691. This website also offers a tribute to the scholarly work of the late James Deetz, professor of historical archaeology. Documents include 135 probates, 24 wills, and 14 texts containing laws and court cases on land division, master-servant relations, sexual misconduct, and disputes involving Native Americans.

The site also provides more than 90 biographical studies, research papers, and topical articles that analyze "life ways" of 395 individuals who lived in the colony and offer theoretical views on the colony's legal structure, gender roles, vernacular house forms, and domestic violence. There are 25 maps or plans, approximately 50 photographs, and excerpts from Deetz's books on the history and myths of Plymouth Colony and on Anglo-American gravestone styles.