Episode 21: “Tribal Sovereignty” 101: Limited Sovereignty, Federal Domination, and the Language Trap

On • Duration 1:01:01

Powered by RedCircle

Steve and Peter unpack “tribal sovereignty,” federal anti-Indian law, Cohen’s Handbook, and the domination framework hidden in plain sight.

Today we unpack the phrase "tribal sovereignty" to show that it is an oxymoron and that functions to obscure the domination inherent in federal anti-Indian law.

"Sovereignty" means a claim of unlimited power. Jean Bodin defined it as supremacy over citizens or subjects unrestrained by the laws. Sterling Edmonds defined "sovereignty' as an authority independent of any other earthly authority.

If "tribal sovereignty" were actually sovereignty, Native nations and peoples would be subject to no other laws than their own.

But federal anti-Indian law defines "tribal sovereignty" as "limited sovereignty", which is an oxymoron since "sovereignty" means a claim of unlimited power.

Federal anti-Indian law also defines "tribal sovereignty" as "sovereignty that the US has not extinguished". A clear statement of the US claim of a right of domination.

We go through all these definitions and point out where the twists and turns happen that convert "tribal sovereignty" into a deception meant to confuse those who think they are proclaiming a free and independent existence when in fact they are using a concept that binds them into unfree and dependent existence.

We illustrate the confusion by discussing a March 2026 document that asserts Lakota land rights while simultaneously accepting the domination framework that denies Lakota land rights.

Transcript

Download an AI Generated Transcript of this conversation

RESOURCES:

Citation

Steve Newcomb and Peter d’Errico, "“Tribal Sovereignty” 101: Limited Sovereignty, Federal Domination, and the Language Trap," Domination Chronicles (Podcast), 2026-05-25, https://dominationchronicles.com/e021-tribal-sovereignty-101/.

Citation Downloads

Episodes

Our Lastest Podcast Epsiodes

Episode 23: Bishops, Papal Bulls, and the Problem of Domination

Episode 23: Bishops, Papal Bulls, and the Problem of Domination

Play Epsiode
Episode 22: Where Are We Now? Why Domination Is the Beginning of the Conversation, Not the End

Episode 22: Where Are We Now? Why Domination Is the Beginning of the Conversation, Not the End

Play Epsiode
Episode 21: “Tribal Sovereignty” 101: Limited Sovereignty, Federal Domination, and the Language Trap

Episode 21: “Tribal Sovereignty” 101: Limited Sovereignty, Federal Domination, and the Language Trap

Play Epsiode

About Host

Domination Chronicles Host

Peter d'Errico

Peter d'Errico

About Peter d'Errico

Peter d’Errico graduated from Yale Law School in 1968. He was an attorney at Dinébe’iiná Náhiiłna be Agha’diit’ahii, Navajo Legal Services, in Shiprock, 1968-1970.

Steven T. Newcomb

Steven T. Newcomb

About Steven T. Newcomb

Steven T. Newcomb (Shawnee/Lenape) has been researching the history of U.S. federal Indian law and policy for four decades.

Domination Chronicles Podcast