Why Many California Indian Tribes Still Lack U.S. Recognition

One afternoon in September 2016, I sat on a bench in front of the National Archives in Washington after a long day of research. While I was scrolling through social media to pass the time before my trip arrived, a press release shared by a colleague caught my attention. In just two days, the National Museum of the American Indian would unveil, for the first time, one of the treaties that the California Indigenous Nations had negotiated with the United States.

“The Treaty of Temecula is one of 18 treaties negotiated between the United States and the American Indian nations in California and presented to the United States Senate on June 1, 1852 by President Millard Fillmore,” the advertisement read. “Unbeknownst to the American Indian signatories, the U.S. Senate rejected the treaties and ordered them to be kept secret for more than fifty years,” leaving the tribes “homeless, without any local, state, or federal legal recourse.” and leading “to ethnic cleansing.” in which the population of American Indians in California fell from perhaps 150,000 to 30,000 between 1846 and 1870.”

My heart skipped a beat. The museum planned to reveal the treaty that a captain of my tribe, the Mission San Luis Rey Band of Indians of San Diego County, had signed more than a century and a half ago without success.

The press release went on to say that tribal representatives from four nations affected by the treaty would be present. I called my mom and asked her if she had heard about it through any communication from the tribal council. She confirmed that no one from my tribe was aware of the inauguration, even though our captain, Pedro Ka-wa-wish, was among the signatories. My mom cried on the other end of the line.

“Olivia,” he said, “you have to be there. …You need to represent San Luis Rey because no one else will.”

After unsuccessful attempts to contact museum officials, I arrived on the morning of the opening as an uninvited guest. I walked on the deserted sidewalks in front of the building for a few minutes until I saw some people enter through the glass doors. I continued.

An employee who took me for a tourist informed me that the museum was not yet open.

“I'm here for the treaty event,” I said confidently. He pulled out a guest list and asked for my affiliation, but couldn't locate my tribe on the list. After I told him that the captain of the San Luis Rey Band had signed the Treaty of Temecula, he decided to let me wait there while members of the invited tribal delegations viewed the treaty in private before its installation.

Once settled, I joined the guests in the dimly lit exhibition space. We gathered around the treatise, which seemed small compared to the display case in which it rested, illuminated from above by a single light. The museum director gave opening remarks before offering the floor to representatives of the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, the San Manuel Band of Misioneros Indians and the Ramona Band of Cahuilla.

Tribal leaders spoke forcefully about how the failure to ratify the treaties had affected California tribes. Mark Macarro, president of the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians, recalled that his fellow Native Americans insisted that the “mission Indians” are not like other Indians because they do not have treaties with the United States. As he spoke, the Treaty of Temecula, negotiated within Pechanga territory, served as a physical reminder that the California Indian experience is as valid as any Native American experience.

I was honored to be a part of the opening ceremony and proud of my California Indian identity. But I also felt deeply uncomfortable, surrounded as I was by delegations from federally recognized tribes. I felt out of place remembering that no one had invited me or my tribe to participate in this historic occasion.

The treaty clearly reminded me that the United States does not recognize the inherent sovereignty of the San Luis Rey Mission Band of Indians, despite our Gold Rush-era negotiations. I wondered why the museum didn't inform my tribe about the event and couldn't help but think that the lack of federal recognition of my community might be the reason. I looked at the treaty and saw the X of Ka-wa-wish next to those of the Luiseño, Cupeño, Cahuilla and Serrano signatories. One hundred and sixty-four years later, I was together with representatives of the same people.

My experience at the inauguration illustrates the complexity and contradictions of unrecognized tribal status in California. The failure to ratify the 18 treaties set the tone for the federal government's long-standing unequal treatment of California's indigenous peoples and tribes. At the same time, treaties became key to strengthening California Indian activism in the early 20th century, leading to the contemporary tribal quest for federal recognition.

California has more tribes that are not federally recognized than any other state, raising questions about California Indians' history with the U.S. government, Native American identity politics, and issues of path to recognition proposed by the Department of the Interior, known as the federal path. recognition process. Eighty-one California tribes have sought recognition since 1978, but only one has gained federal recognition.

California's federally unrecognized tribes face intertwined legacies of Spanish and Mexican colonization, California- and U.S.-funded genocide, Congressional refusal to ratify treaties, and the termination of state tribes. From the nature of our highly diverse pre-contact society, from small, autonomous political entities, to the destructive forces of successive colonial regimes, the distinctive history of the California Indians is often incompatible with the criteria for federal recognition.

The process is part of a long lineage of colonial policies designed to establish federal authority over Native communities. In seeking federal recognition, tribes confront the lasting power of the United States to define Indigenous identities on their own terms. Even as unrecognized tribes work to assert their inherent sovereignty, settler structures serve to disempower us.

Olivia M. Chilcote is an assistant professor of American Indian Studies at San Diego State University and author of “Not recognized in California: Federal Recognition and the San Luis Rey Mission Band of Indians,” from which it is adapted.