Tribal Governance: Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) vs. Non-IRA Tribal Constitutions
Types of Tribal Constitutions: IRA and Non-IRA
Tribal constitutions are the primary documents of Indian tribes in the US. They lay out the fundamental laws regarding the administration of the tribe, the judicial system, and laws protecting the independence and rights of the tribe’s members. There are two types of tribal constitutions: the Indian Reorganization Act (IRA) and non-IRA.
IRA constitutions are based on federal law, while non-IRAs are based on traditional tribal government models. However, both types of laws have a common purpose: to determine the political system of the tribe and the rights of its members. Therefore, this paper will analyze the similarities and differences between IRA and non-IRA constitutions.
Similarities and Differences Between IRA and Non-IRA Constitutions
The main difference between the two types of tribal constitutions lies in the federal government’s intervention in their adoption. IRA constitutions require federal review, while non-IRA constitutions do not (Jaeger 10). Nevertheless, both laws have the same validity and legal status. Tribes subject to the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 are required to draw up their constitutions and submit them to the federal government for approval.
Since this type of tribal constitution is primarily based on state laws, IRA tribes have a system of government similar to that of the state. In such tribes, there are three branches of power, each performing a separate function. Although IRA constitutions are based on federal law, they may have specific articles and sections based on the needs, history, and cultural values of each tribe.
Non-IRA constitutions are optional for traditional tribes, but in most cases, they are still drawn up. According to Jaeger, two-thirds of Indian tribes in the US are non-IRA, and most of them have their own constitution (8). These documents are often based on the traditional methods of the tribe’s administration and the social and political structure. Non-IRA constitutions, for the most part, focus on the cultural and historical characteristics of the tribe.
Therefore, the key objective of this document is to preserve the community’s territory, resources, and cultural traditions and customs. Legislation in non-IRA tribes is often based on collective decision-making, and the elders govern the tribe. In addition, the laws may change with the tribe’s development and modernization. Many non-IRA constitutions may adopt certain elements of the federal political system, combining them with traditional methods of government.
Moreover, there is a significant difference in the procedure for adopting these two types of constitutions. Tribal IRAs have a clear process for submitting their constitutions to the Department of the Interior for review. The Department must review and approve or reject the tribal constitution within 180 days (Jaeger 11).
If the submitted constitution does not contradict federal laws, it is submitted to the secretarial election. During this process, members of the tribe vote to pass laws, after which the constitution is adopted (Jaeger 22). There are no such procedures for non-IRA constitutions, and they are adopted within the tribe by joint drafting of laws and voting.
My Tribe’s Constitution: Type and Adoption Date
As I am from the Native Village of Savoonga, Alaska, my tribe has the IRA Constitution, which was created in 1934 and ratified in 1940. It contains the tribe’s name, terms of membership, political system, village’s powers, and members’ rights. While there are differences between IRA and non-IRA constitutions, their primary purpose is to define the self-government, sovereignty, and jurisdiction of Indian tribes. The IRA is based on federal law, and its primary purpose is to protect tribal interests and preserve territory and culture.
Work Cited
Jaeger, Lisa. “Tribal Constitutions.” Tanana Chiefs Conference, Nov. 2001, pp. 7-27.