## Facts

- Mary and Carrie Dann were U.S. citizens and members of the Western Shoshone people living and ranching in Crescent Valley, Nevada, on land they asserted was part of Western Shoshone ancestral territory used and occupied under indigenous communal land tenure.
- A Western Shoshone claim was brought in 1951 before the Indian Claims Commission (ICC) by the Temoak Band on behalf of the “Western Shoshone Identifiable Group,” alleging federal taking and extinguishment of aboriginal title over large areas in Nevada and California.
- The ICC determined Western Shoshone aboriginal title had been extinguished, fixed a valuation date of July 1, 1872, and awarded monetary compensation for the land.
- The Danns and others contested the ICC pathway, asserting they did not authorize the claim or consent to extinguishment and that continued occupation and use supported continuing property rights.
- Federal agencies, including the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), treated surrounding lands as federal property and pursued administrative and judicial actions against the Danns for trespass and unauthorized grazing, including livestock removal efforts.
- The United States asserted the Danns retained title to their patented ranch lands, could obtain grazing permits on federal lands if they complied with regulations, and that any broader Western Shoshone interests had been extinguished and properly adjudicated through the ICC and domestic courts.
- The Danns filed a petition in 1993 alleging violations of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man; the IACHR granted precautionary measures in 1999 requesting the U.S. stay livestock impoundment efforts pending review.
- In 2002, the IACHR issued a merits report finding violations and recommending remedial measures.

## Issues

1. Whether the procedures used to determine and extinguish Western Shoshone indigenous property rights, and to assert federal ownership over ancestral lands, satisfied the American Declaration’s requirements of equality before the law, fair trial/effective remedy, and protection of property.
2. Whether enforcement of federal grazing and land regulations against the Danns, premised on ICC determinations and domestic judicial reliance on them, violated the Danns’ rights under the American Declaration.

## Decision

- The IACHR found the United States violated Articles II (equality), XVIII (fair trial), and XXIII (property) of the American Declaration in connection with the Danns’ asserted property rights in Western Shoshone ancestral lands.
- The Commission concluded the ICC-based process used to determine and extinguish indigenous land rights did not conform to applicable standards for indigenous property rights, including adequate participation and remedies consistent with the collective character of those rights.
- The Commission rejected the contention that the ICC proceedings and subsequent domestic litigation conclusively resolved the Danns’ human-rights claims concerning ancestral lands.
- The Commission recommended that the United States provide an effective remedy, including legislative or other measures necessary to ensure respect for the Danns’ property rights consistent with Articles II, XVIII, and XXIII, and to take broader measures to align domestic practice with those standards.

## Legal Principles

- Indigenous property rights protected by the American Declaration may arise from traditional occupation and use and may be collective in character, not limited to formally titled interests.
- Extinguishment or impairment of indigenous property rights must follow procedures that provide meaningful participation and protections consistent with equality before the law and fair-trial/effective-remedy requirements.
- A damages-only mechanism that converts claimed indigenous land rights into a lump-sum monetary award, without realistic consideration of remedies such as protection of continued relationship to land, may be inadequate for purposes of the property and due process protections in the American Declaration.
- International human-rights review may assess domestic adjudications when the domestic processes and their continuing effects are themselves alleged to violate protected rights; domestic reliance on a flawed process does not cure underlying deficiencies.

## Conclusion

The IACHR determined that the United States’ reliance on the ICC framework and related domestic decisions to treat Western Shoshone ancestral lands as fully extinguished failed to provide the Danns equal protection, fair process, and effective protection of indigenous property rights, and it called for effective remedial measures to bring the treatment of Western Shoshone land claims into conformity with the American Declaration.


Mary & Carrie Dann v. United States, Case 11.140, Inter-Am. C.H.R., Report No. 75/02 (2002)