## Facts

- The Omaha Tribe’s reservation boundaries were established through 19th-century federal treaties and statutes.
- In 1882, Congress authorized the Secretary of the Interior to survey, appraise, and sell roughly 50,000 acres of Omaha Reservation land west of a railroad right-of-way and to open it for settlement under regulations prescribed by the Secretary.
- Non-Indian settlers purchased land under the 1882 Act and founded the Village of Pender, Nebraska, within the disputed tract.
- In 2006, the Omaha Tribe amended its beverage control ordinance and asserted regulatory authority (including licensing and taxation) over alcohol retailers in Pender under 18 U.S.C. § 1161.
- Nebraska, local officials, and alcohol retailers sued in federal court seeking declaratory and injunctive relief, arguing that the 1882 Act diminished the reservation and placed Pender outside “Indian country.”
- The district court rejected the diminishment claim, and the Eighth Circuit affirmed.

## Issues

1. Whether Congress, by enacting the Act of Aug. 7, 1882, diminished the boundaries of the Omaha Indian Reservation so that the land containing Pender lies outside the reservation.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed the Eighth Circuit.
- The Court held that the 1882 Act did not diminish the Omaha Indian Reservation.
- The Court concluded that Pender and the surrounding disputed land remain within the reservation boundaries.

## Legal Principles

- Only Congress may diminish reservation boundaries, and congressional intent to do so must be clear.
- Under the Solem framework, the statutory text is the most important evidence of diminishment; the inquiry looks for cession language or an unconditional congressional commitment to compensate the tribe for opened land.
- Historical context and contemporaneous understanding may confirm or undermine a textual reading, but mixed historical evidence cannot supply the clear intent missing from the statute’s text.
- Subsequent demographic and jurisdictional history is the least compelling evidence and cannot, by itself, diminish reservation boundaries or override the absence of clear congressional intent.

## Conclusion

Because the 1882 Act lacked cession language or equivalent textual indicators of a present and total surrender of tribal interests, and because the remaining evidence did not show a clear, widely held understanding that the reservation would shrink, the Court held the Omaha Reservation was not diminished and that Pender remains within its boundaries.


Nebraska v. Parker, 577 U.S. 481 (2016)