United States v. Reily

Background

The United States sued to enforce federal rules protecting allotted Indian land held under a restricted trust patent. A Kickapoo woman received an allotment that could not be sold for a set period, and the restriction could be extended by the President. She moved to Mexico in 1903 and lived with a Mexican Kickapoo community until her death in 1929. Her son, born a Kickapoo allottee’s child, lived in Mexico until 1920, then returned to and lived on the Oklahoma Kickapoo reservation. He inherited the land in 1929 and conveyed part of it to a private buyer in 1930. The buyer prevailed below, and the United States appealed.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the 1906 Act removed the sale restriction for this heir. The Court explained the Act’s language was unclear but concluded it was meant to remove restrictions only for Indians who were nonresidents of the United States at the time they owned the land. Because the son was living in Oklahoma when he inherited, his ownership did not coincide with nonresidence. The Court relied on prior interpretations and distinguished cases where heirs were nonresidents. Applying the Act as construed, the restriction remained in force and the 1930 conveyance was void.

Real world impact

The decision means heirs who inherit restricted allotments while residing in the United States cannot rely on the 1906 Act to validate sales made later. The United States may enforce trust-patent restrictions in such situations. The opinion notes the 1906 Act had troubled application and was later repealed with saving clauses protecting rights already acquired under it.