Document Type
Article
Publication Date
Summer 2025
Abstract
The 200th anniversary of the foundational Indian law decision Johnson v. M’Intosh has come and gone, with many scholars contributing criticism and commentary. The dominant focus has been the case’s notorious embrace of the so-called “doctrine of discovery,” an odious theory for rationalizing European nations’ claims of superior rights to lands occupied by Indigenous Native American peoples. Commanding less attention, however, is the Johnson decision’s core protective legal feature, i.e., its reinforcing the United States government’s duty to guard against the alienation of Indian lands through private, unauthorized acquisitions.
This Article offers a somewhat different appraisal of Johnson v. M’Intosh in the context of controversies over Indigenous rights. Notwithstanding the case’s offensive dicta, the unanimous Johnson opinion retains efficacy in safeguarding Native American land rights, provided certain infamous abuses of the decision as precedent can be identified and rectified. Accordingly, this Article examines instances of the modern Supreme Court’s distorting and misusing Johnson v. M’Intosh to damage, weaken, or deny Indian land rights. In centering attention on this abuse, the Article draws on eye‑opening, seldom‑viewed documents found among the papers of Supreme Court Justices archived at the Library of Congress and various universities across the country. The Article also discusses a series of modern‑era opinions by Supreme Court Justices that exemplify instructive conformity to and reliance upon Johnson’s protective features. Moreover, as a response to the joint call for papers issued by the Montana Law Review and the Public Land & Resources Law Review, the Article does not take merely a rear‑view‑mirror look at Johnson v. M’Intosh. Rather, this Article aspires to cast light on judicial distortions and misrepresentations of Johnson to help illuminate a “Vision for the Future” in legal battles over Indigenous property rights.
An accompanying Compendium of Exhibits from the Papers of Supreme Court Justices is available: https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/law_facultyscholarship/962/
Publication Title
Montana Law Review
Volume
86
Issue
2
First Page
281
Last Page
397
Keywords
Indian law, Indigenous land rights, aboriginal title, doctrine of discovery, Johnson v. M’Intosh, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, Worcester v. Georgia, Mitchel v. United States, Chief Justice John Marshall, Justice Joseph Story, Justice Smith Thompson, President Andrew Jackson, U.S. Senator John Randolph, Chancellor James Kent, Justice Stanley Forman Reed, Felix S. Cohen, U.S. Interior Secretary Harold L. Ickes, Chief Justice Frederick Moore Vinson, Justice Felix Frankfurter, Justice William O. Douglas, Justice Hugo L. Black, Justice Robert H. Jackson, Justice Frank Murphy, Justice Wiley Rutledge, Justice Harold Burton, Justice Tom C. Clark, Justice Sherman Minton, Justice Charles E. Whittaker, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice John M. Harlan II, U.S. Senator Burton K. Wheeler, Justice William J. Brennan, Justice William H. Rehnquist, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Justice John Paul Stevens, Justice Lewis F. Powell, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, Justice Harry A. Blackmun, Northwestern Bands of Shoshone Indians v. United States, United States v. Shoshone Tribe, United States v. Alcea Band of Tillamooks (I and II), Korematsu v. United States, Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States, United States v. Santa Fe Pacific Railroad Company, Beecher v. Wetherby, Tulee v. Washington, Hynes v. Grimes Packing Company, Brown v. Board of Education, United States v. Dann, City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation, Federal Power Commission v. Tuscarora Indian Nation, Choctaw Nation v. Oklahoma, Montgomery v. United States, Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida, County of Oneida v. Oneida Indian Nation, Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Company v. Pueblo of Santa Ana, South Carolina v. Catawba Indian Tribe, U.S. Dakota War of 1862, Interior Secretary Caleb B. Smith, Indian Claims Commission
Recommended Citation
John P. LaVelle, Uses and Abuses of Johnson v. M’Intosh in Native American Land Rights Cases: Investigative Insights from the Indian Law Justice Files, 86 MONT. L. REV. 281 (2025).