SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Navajo fire fighters head out for the night shift to put out a fire in 2011 (AFP/Getty Images/Kevork Djansezian)
US Shortchanged Native American Tribes by Millions, Supreme Court Rules
Native Americans to get millions after 'big victory'
Jun 19, 2012
In a Supreme Court decision announced on Monday, justices ruled that the United States government has shortchanged the Ramah Navajo Chapter among several other Native American tribes by millions of dollars in public service contracts.
The justices sided 5-4 with the tribes in a class action suit claiming unfair treatment by the department of the interior.
Under the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 Native American tribes were given contracts from the federal government to run public services such as police, schools, hospitals, environmental services and more. According to the ruling, the government began to shortchange payments for these services by implementing a payment 'ceiling', which capped the amount of money allotted to the tribes for their services, no longer paying for each contract in full.
"Consistent with longstanding principles of government contracting law, we hold that the government must pay each tribe's contract support costs in full," wrote justice Sonya Sotomayor, delivering the court's opinion.
"The government was trying to treat tribal contractors differently from all other contractors. If you were talking about a defense contractor, I don't think this case would have reached the supreme court - the government would have paid up long ago," said the tribe's lawyer Jonathan Cohn.
Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico stated, "This gets us back to the principle that the government must pay us what we are entitled to."
* * *
The Guardian/UK: Native American tribes owed millions from government, supreme court rules
Native American tribes are celebrating a major victory in their battle for equal treatment after the US supreme court ruled that the government could no longer short-change them over contracts for public services.
In a ruling announced on Monday, the justices sided 5-4 with the tribes, who had taken out a class action suit complaining that they were being treated unfairly by the department of the interior.
The suit claimed that the government had over many years withheld millions of dollars owed to the tribes by imposing a cap on the contracts it had taken out with them.
Native American leaders hailed the ruling as an important victory. Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico that was a plaintiff in the case, said they had been saddened that they had to go all the way to the supreme court to find redress. [...]
Jonathan Cohn of the Washington-based law firm Sidley Austin, who jointly represented the tribes, said the judgment was a "big victory for the tribes. The government must fulfill its commitments and ensure the tribes get paid."
Cohn said that it was rare for Native American issues to reach the supreme court, and even rarer for the court to side with the tribes. At the heart of the case, he added, was the principle of equal treatment.
* * *
MSNBC: Native Americans to get millions after 'big victory' in Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the majority opinion for Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito dissented.
"We stressed that the government's obligation to pay contract support costs should be treated as an ordinary contract promise," Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority ruling which confirmed a Colorado appeals court decision.
"The government was obligated to pay the tribes' contract support costs in full."
Congress allocated $1.6 billion to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for "the operations of Indian programs" in 2000, according to news agency AFP, but only $120.2 million was paid out.
"Between FY [financial year] 1994 and 2001, appropriations covered only between 77% and 92% of tribes' aggregate contract support costs," the judgment read.
# # #
Why Your Ongoing Support Is Essential
Donald Trump’s attacks on democracy, justice, and a free press are escalating — putting everything we stand for at risk. We believe a better world is possible, but we can’t get there without your support. Common Dreams stands apart. We answer only to you — our readers, activists, and changemakers — not to billionaires or corporations. Our independence allows us to cover the vital stories that others won’t, spotlighting movements for peace, equality, and human rights. Right now, our work faces unprecedented challenges. Misinformation is spreading, journalists are under attack, and financial pressures are mounting. As a reader-supported, nonprofit newsroom, your support is crucial to keep this journalism alive. Whatever you can give — $10, $25, or $100 — helps us stay strong and responsive when the world needs us most. Together, we’ll continue to build the independent, courageous journalism our movement relies on. Thank you for being part of this community. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
In a Supreme Court decision announced on Monday, justices ruled that the United States government has shortchanged the Ramah Navajo Chapter among several other Native American tribes by millions of dollars in public service contracts.
The justices sided 5-4 with the tribes in a class action suit claiming unfair treatment by the department of the interior.
Under the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 Native American tribes were given contracts from the federal government to run public services such as police, schools, hospitals, environmental services and more. According to the ruling, the government began to shortchange payments for these services by implementing a payment 'ceiling', which capped the amount of money allotted to the tribes for their services, no longer paying for each contract in full.
"Consistent with longstanding principles of government contracting law, we hold that the government must pay each tribe's contract support costs in full," wrote justice Sonya Sotomayor, delivering the court's opinion.
"The government was trying to treat tribal contractors differently from all other contractors. If you were talking about a defense contractor, I don't think this case would have reached the supreme court - the government would have paid up long ago," said the tribe's lawyer Jonathan Cohn.
Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico stated, "This gets us back to the principle that the government must pay us what we are entitled to."
* * *
The Guardian/UK: Native American tribes owed millions from government, supreme court rules
Native American tribes are celebrating a major victory in their battle for equal treatment after the US supreme court ruled that the government could no longer short-change them over contracts for public services.
In a ruling announced on Monday, the justices sided 5-4 with the tribes, who had taken out a class action suit complaining that they were being treated unfairly by the department of the interior.
The suit claimed that the government had over many years withheld millions of dollars owed to the tribes by imposing a cap on the contracts it had taken out with them.
Native American leaders hailed the ruling as an important victory. Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico that was a plaintiff in the case, said they had been saddened that they had to go all the way to the supreme court to find redress. [...]
Jonathan Cohn of the Washington-based law firm Sidley Austin, who jointly represented the tribes, said the judgment was a "big victory for the tribes. The government must fulfill its commitments and ensure the tribes get paid."
Cohn said that it was rare for Native American issues to reach the supreme court, and even rarer for the court to side with the tribes. At the heart of the case, he added, was the principle of equal treatment.
* * *
MSNBC: Native Americans to get millions after 'big victory' in Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the majority opinion for Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito dissented.
"We stressed that the government's obligation to pay contract support costs should be treated as an ordinary contract promise," Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority ruling which confirmed a Colorado appeals court decision.
"The government was obligated to pay the tribes' contract support costs in full."
Congress allocated $1.6 billion to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for "the operations of Indian programs" in 2000, according to news agency AFP, but only $120.2 million was paid out.
"Between FY [financial year] 1994 and 2001, appropriations covered only between 77% and 92% of tribes' aggregate contract support costs," the judgment read.
# # #
In a Supreme Court decision announced on Monday, justices ruled that the United States government has shortchanged the Ramah Navajo Chapter among several other Native American tribes by millions of dollars in public service contracts.
The justices sided 5-4 with the tribes in a class action suit claiming unfair treatment by the department of the interior.
Under the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 Native American tribes were given contracts from the federal government to run public services such as police, schools, hospitals, environmental services and more. According to the ruling, the government began to shortchange payments for these services by implementing a payment 'ceiling', which capped the amount of money allotted to the tribes for their services, no longer paying for each contract in full.
"Consistent with longstanding principles of government contracting law, we hold that the government must pay each tribe's contract support costs in full," wrote justice Sonya Sotomayor, delivering the court's opinion.
"The government was trying to treat tribal contractors differently from all other contractors. If you were talking about a defense contractor, I don't think this case would have reached the supreme court - the government would have paid up long ago," said the tribe's lawyer Jonathan Cohn.
Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico stated, "This gets us back to the principle that the government must pay us what we are entitled to."
* * *
The Guardian/UK: Native American tribes owed millions from government, supreme court rules
Native American tribes are celebrating a major victory in their battle for equal treatment after the US supreme court ruled that the government could no longer short-change them over contracts for public services.
In a ruling announced on Monday, the justices sided 5-4 with the tribes, who had taken out a class action suit complaining that they were being treated unfairly by the department of the interior.
The suit claimed that the government had over many years withheld millions of dollars owed to the tribes by imposing a cap on the contracts it had taken out with them.
Native American leaders hailed the ruling as an important victory. Rodger Martinez, president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter in New Mexico that was a plaintiff in the case, said they had been saddened that they had to go all the way to the supreme court to find redress. [...]
Jonathan Cohn of the Washington-based law firm Sidley Austin, who jointly represented the tribes, said the judgment was a "big victory for the tribes. The government must fulfill its commitments and ensure the tribes get paid."
Cohn said that it was rare for Native American issues to reach the supreme court, and even rarer for the court to side with the tribes. At the heart of the case, he added, was the principle of equal treatment.
* * *
MSNBC: Native Americans to get millions after 'big victory' in Supreme Court
Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote the majority opinion for Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas and Elena Kagan. Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer and Samuel Alito dissented.
"We stressed that the government's obligation to pay contract support costs should be treated as an ordinary contract promise," Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in the majority ruling which confirmed a Colorado appeals court decision.
"The government was obligated to pay the tribes' contract support costs in full."
Congress allocated $1.6 billion to the Bureau of Indian Affairs for "the operations of Indian programs" in 2000, according to news agency AFP, but only $120.2 million was paid out.
"Between FY [financial year] 1994 and 2001, appropriations covered only between 77% and 92% of tribes' aggregate contract support costs," the judgment read.
# # #
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.
LATEST NEWS
'Full of Tears,' 1,000 Palestinian Children Graduate From Gaza School for Orphans
"The children wept, as no parents were there to share the moment—their parents had been killed by the Israeli army," said one observer.
Aug 19, 2025
More than 1,000 Palestinians children orphaned by Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza took part in a bittersweet graduation ceremony Monday at a special school in the south of the embattled enclave as Israeli forces continued their US-backed campaign of annihilation and ethnic cleansing nearby.
Dressed in caps and gowns and waving Palestinian flags, graduates of the school at al-Wafa Orphan Village in Khan Younis—opened earlier this year by speech pathologist Wafaa Abu Jalala—received diplomas as students and staff proudly looked on. It was a remarkable event given the tremendous suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, especially the children, and Israel's obliteration of the strip's educational infrastructure, often referred to as scholasticide.
Organizers said the event was the largest of its kind since Israel began leveling Gaza after the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. Israel's assault and siege, which are the subject of an International Court of Justice genocide case, have left more than 62,000 Palestinians dead, including over 18,500 children—official death tolls that are likely to be a severe undercount.
The Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics reported in April that nearly 40,000 children in Gaza have lost one or more of their parents to Israeli bombs and bullets in what the agency called the world's "largest orphan crisis" in modern history. Other independent groups say the number of orphans is even higher during a war in which medical professionals have coined a grim new acronym: WCNSF—wounded child, no surviving family.
Hundreds of thousands of other Palestinians are starving in what Amnesty International on Monday called a "deliberate campaign." Thousands of Gazan children are treated for malnutrition each month, and at least 122 have starved to death, according to local officials.
Early in the war, the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) called Gaza "the world's most dangerous place to be a child." Last year, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres for the first time added Israel to his so-called "List of Shame" of countries that kill and injure children during wars and other armed conflicts. Doctors and others including volunteers from the United States have documented many cases in which they've concluded Israeli snipers and other troops have deliberately shot children in the head and chest.
Palestinian children take part in a graduation ceremony at al-Wafa Orphan Village in Khan Younis, Gaza on August 18, 2025. (Photo: Abdallah Alattar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
There are also more child amputees in Gaza than anywhere else in the world, with UN agencies estimating earlier this year that 3,000-4,000 Palestinian children have had one or more limbs removed, sometimes without anesthesia. The administration of US President Donald Trump—which provides Israel with many of the weapons used to kill and maim Palestinian children—recently stopped issuing visas to amputees and other victims seeking medical treatment in the United States.
All of the above have wrought what one Gaza mother called the "complete psychological destruction" of children in the embattled enclave.
Indeed, a 2024 survey of more than 500 Palestinian children in Gaza revealed that 96% of them fear imminent death, 92% are not accepting of reality, 79% suffer from nightmares, 77% avoid discussing traumatic events, 73% display signs of aggression, 49% wish to die because of the war, and many more "show signs of withdrawal and severe anxiety, alongside a pervasive sense of hopelessness."
Iain Overton, executive director of the UK-based group Action on Armed Violence, said at the time of the survey's publication that "the world's failure to protect Gaza's children is a moral failing on a monumental scale."
'Betrayal of Humanity': Nearly Half of 383 Aid Workers Killed Last Year Were in Gaza
"No state should be above the law," said Younis Alkhatib of the Palestine Red Crescent Society. "The international community is obliged to protect humanitarians and to stop impunity."
Aug 19, 2025
The United Nations humanitarian affairs office said Tuesday that the new record of 383 aid workers killed last year while performing their lifesaving jobs was "shocking"—but considering Israel's relentless attacks on civilians, medical staff, journalists, and relief workers in Gaza, it was no surprise that the bombardment of the enclave was a major driver of the rise in aid worker deaths in 2024.
Nearly half of the aid workers killed last year—181 of them—were killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza, while 60 died in Sudan amid the civil war there.
The United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) recorded a 31% increase in aid worker killings compared to 2023, the agency said as it marked World Humanitarian Day.
"Even one attack against a humanitarian colleague is an attack on all of us and on the people we serve," said Tom Fletcher, the UN under-secretary-general for humanitarian affairs. "Attacks on this scale, with zero accountability, are a shameful indictment of international inaction and apathy."
Israel and its top allies, including the United States, have persisted in claiming it is targeting Hamas in its attacks on Gaza, which have killed more than 62,000 people—likely a significant undercount by the Gaza Health Ministry. It has also repeatedly claimed that its attacks on aid workers and other people protected under international law were "accidental."
"Every attack is a grave betrayal of humanity, and the rules designed to protect them and the communities they serve. Each killing sends a dangerous message that their lives were expendable. They were not."
"As the humanitarian community, we demand—again—that those with power and influence act for humanity, protect civilians and aid workers, and hold perpetrators to account," said Fletcher.
The UN Security Council adopted a resolution in May 2024 reaffirming that humanitarian staff must be protected in conflict zones—a month after the Israel Defense Forces struck a convoy including seven workers from the US-based charity World Central Kitchen, killing all of them.
More than a year later, said OCHA, "the lack of accountability remains pervasive."
The UN-backed Aid Worker Security Database's provisional numbers for 2025 so far show that at least 265 aid workers have been killed this year, with one of the deadliest attacks perpetrated by the IDF against medics and emergency responders in clearly marked vehicles in Gaza. Eight of the workers were with the Palestine Red Crescent Society, which on Tuesday noted that "Palestinian humanitarian workers have been deliberately targeted more than anywhere else."
"No state should be above the law," said Younis Alkhatib, president of the humanitarian group. "The international community is obliged to protect humanitarians and to stop impunity."
UN Secretary-General António Guterres said Tuesday that humanitarian workers around the world "are the last lifeline for over 300 million people" living in conflict and disaster zones.
What is missing as advocates demand protection for aid workers and as "red lines are crossed with impunity," said Guterres, is "political will—and moral courage."
"Humanitarians must be respected and protected," he said. "They can never be targeted."
Olga Cherevko of OCHA emphasized that despite Israel's continued bombardment of Gaza's healthcare systemsystem and its attacks at aid hubs, humanitarian workers continue their efforts to save lives "day in and day out."
"I think as a humanitarian, I feel powerless sometimes in Gaza because I know what it is that we can do as humanitarians when we're enabled to do so, both here in Gaza and in any other humanitarian crisis," said Cherevko. "We continue to face massive impediments for delivering aid at scale, when our missions are delayed, when our missions lasted 12, 14, 18 hours; the routes that we're given are dangerous, impassible, or inaccessible."
Israel has blocked the United Nations and other established aid agencies that have worked for years in the occupied Palestinian territories from delivering lifesaving aid in recent months, pushing the entire enclave towards famine.
The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) added in a statement that "our colleagues continue to show up not because they are fearless, but because the suffering is too urgent to ignore. Yet, courage is not protection, and dedication does not deflect bullets."
"The rules of war are clear: Humanitarian personnel must be respected and protected," said the ICRC. "Every attack is a grave betrayal of humanity, and the rules designed to protect them and the communities they serve. Each killing sends a dangerous message that their lives were expendable. They were not."
Along with the aid workers who were killed worldwide last year, 308 were injured, 125 were kidnapped, and 45 were detained for their work.
"Violence against aid workers is not inevitable," said Fletcher. "It must end."
Mass Layoffs at John Deere Follow Depressed Sales Caused by Trump Tariffs
"Equipment manufacturers like John Deere have lost millions, but let's remember that working people are hit hardest by the president's disastrous economic policies," said one lawmaker.
Aug 19, 2025
US President Donald Trump has pitched his tariffs on foreign goods as a way to bring more manufacturing jobs back into the United States.
However, it now appears as though the tariffs are hurting the manufacturing jobs that are already here.
As reported by Des Moines Register, iconic American machinery company John Deere announced on Monday that it is laying off 71 workers in Waterloo, Iowa, as well as 115 people in East Moline, Illinois, and 52 workers in Moline, Illinois. The paper noted that John Deere has laid off more than 2,000 employees since April 2024.
In its announcement of the layoffs, the company said that "the struggling [agriculture] economy continues to impact orders" for its equipment.
"This is a challenging time for many farmers, growers, and producers, and directly impacts our business in the near term," the company emphasized.
According to The New Republic, Cory Reed, president of John Deere's Worldwide Agriculture and Turf Division, said during the company's most recent earnings call that the uncertainty surrounding Trump's tariffs has led to many farmers putting off investments in farm equipment.
"If you have customers that are concerned about what their end markets are going to look like in a tariff environment, they're waiting to see the outcomes of what these trade deals look like," he explained.
Josh Beal, John Deere's director of investor relations, similarly said that "the primary drivers" for the company's negative outlook from the prior quarter "are increased tariff rates on Europe, India, and steel and aluminum."
The news of the layoffs drew a scathing rebuke from Nathan Sage, an Iowa Democrat running for the US Senate to unseat Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who has praised the president's tariff policies.
"John Deere is once again laying off Iowans—a clear sign economic uncertainty hits the working class hardest, not the CEOs at the top," he wrote in a post on X. "Cheered on by Joni Ernst, Republicans in Washington want to play games with tariffs and give tax cuts to billionaires while Iowa families continue to struggle. It's time to stop protecting the top 1% and fight for the working people who keep our economy strong."
Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) also ripped Trump's trade policies for hurting blue-collar jobs.
"Because of Trump's tariffs, farmers can't afford to buy what they need to make a living," he said. "Equipment manufacturers like John Deere have lost millions, but let's remember that working people are hit hardest by the president's disastrous economic policies. Tired of 'winning' yet?"
John Deere is not the only big-name American manufacturer to be harmed by the Trump tariffs, as all three of the country's major auto manufacturers in recent months have announced they expect to take significant financial hits from them.
Ford last month said that its profit could plunge by up to 36% this year as it expects to take a $2 billion hit from the president's tariffs on key inputs such as steel and aluminum, as well as taxes on car components manufactured in Canada and Mexico.
General Motors last month also cited the Trump tariffs as a major reason why its profits fell by $3 billion the previous quarter. Making matters worse, GM said that the impact of the tariffs would be even more significant in the coming quarter when its profits could tumble by as much as $5 billion.
GM's warning came shortly after Jeep manufacturer Stellantis projected that the Trump tariffs would directly lead to $350 million in losses in the first half of 2025.
Most Popular
We cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Please support our journalism.