Template:Nhsc-v1-346

D. LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY AND COMPENSATION Native groups have a l s o made claims t h a t they should be given compensation for loss of " s o v e r e i g n t y . " This s e c t i o n defines s o v e r e i g n t y and then c o n s i d e r s whether the law p r o v i d es compensation for i t s loss in the c o n t e x t of the f a c t s r e l e v a n t to n a t i v e Hawaiians. The Office of Hawaiian A f f a i rs d e f i n e s s o v e r e i g n t y as the power to c o n t r o l i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l a f f a i rs and the r i g h t of s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t . 158/ The United S t a t e s courts have examined t h e concept of s o v e r e i g n t y for I n d i an t r i b e s and t h a t c o n s i d e r a t i o n would be a p p l i c a b l e as well to n a t i ve Hawaiians: The powers of the Indian t r i b e s are, in g e n e r a l, " i n h e r e n t powers of a l i m i t ed s o v e r e i g n t y which has never been e x t i n g u i s h e d . . . " Before t h e coming of Europeans, the t r i b e s were s e l f - g o v e r n i ng s o v e r e i g n p o l i t i c al communities. [Cites o m i t t e d ]. I n d i a n t r i b e s a r e , of course, no longer "possessed of the f u l l a t t r i b u t e s of s o v e r e i g n t y . " . . . T h e i r i n c o r p o r a t i o n with the t e r r i t o r y of the United S t a t e s, and t h e i r acceptance of i ts p r o t e c t i o n , n e c e s s a r i ly d i v e s t e d them of some a s p e c ts of the s o v e r e i g n t y which they had p r e v i o u s l y e x e r c i s e d . . . B ut our cases recognize that the I n d i a n t r i b e s have not given up t h e i r f u l l s o v e r e i g n t y . We have r e c e n t l y s a i d : "Indian t r i b e s are unique a g g r e g a t i o ns p o s s e s s i n g a t t r i b u t e s of s o v e r e i g n t y over both t h e ir members and t h e i r t e r r i t o r y . . ." The s o v e r e i g n t y that the Indian t r i b e s r e t a i n is of a unique and l i m i t e d c h a r a c t e r . It e x i s t s only at the sufferance of Congress and is s u b j e c t to complete defeasance. But u n t il Congress a c t s , the t r i b es r e t a i n t h e i r e x i s t i n g sovereiqn powers. In sum, Indian t r i b es s t i l l possess those aspects of s o v e r e i g n t y not withdrawn by t r e a t y or s t a t u t e , or by i m p l i c a t i o n as a necessary r e s u l t of t h e i r dependent s t a t u s . . . 1 5 9 / The p a r t of t h e i r s o v e r e i g n t y that Indian t r i b e s have " i m p l i c i t l y l o s t by v i r t u e of t h e i r dependent s t a t u s " is t h e power to c o n t r o l t h e i r e x t e r n al r e l a t i o n s with non-members of the t r i b e . 160/ As a r e s u l t , Indian t r i b e s are not free to a l i e n a t e t h e ir land to n o n - I n d i a n s , to have " d i r e ct commercial or governmental r e l a t i o ns with foreign n a t i o n s , " or to e x e r c i se .criminal j u r i s d i c t i o n over non-members i n t r i b a l c o u r t s . 161/ The s o v e r e i g n t y r e t a i n e d by Indian t r i b e s encompasses the power of t r i b al s e l f - g o v e r n m e n t and the power to c o n t r o l i n t e r n a l r e l a t i o n s among the members of the t r i b e . 162/ Thus, I n d i a n t r i b e s r e t a i n t h e i r power to determine t r i b a l membership, r e g u l a te domestic r e l a t i o n s , promulgate rules of i n h e r i t a n c e for t r i b a l members, and e x e r c i s e criminal j u r i s d i c t i o n over t r i b a l members. 163/ For n a t i v e Hawaiians, by analogy, t h e r e are claims that native Hawaiians l o s t a l l a t t r i b u t e s of s o v e r e i g n t y— t h e power to deal with foreign n a t i o n s , to c o n t r o l i n t e r n al r e l a t i o n s , and to govern themselves. It has been argued that the power of self-government was e f f e c t i v e l y lost with the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of the P r o v i s i o n a l Government in 1893, and was t o t a l l y l o s t when the T e r r i t o r i al Government was e s t a b l i s h e d pursuant to t h e Organic Act of 1900 (31 S t a t. 141). 164/ Even if h i s t o r y had f u l ly e s t a b l i s h e d these claims, which the p r e c e d i n g chapter does not, native Hawaiians could not be compensated for l o s s of s o v e r e i g n t y. 346