ABSTRACT
The diminishment cases determined whether the reduction of the tribal land base affected tribal territorial sovereignty. Central to the jurisdictional quandaries was whether the sale of a parcel of land to non-Indians also vanquished tribal territorial sovereignty over that land. As evidenced by analysis of Floyd DeCoteau and Rosebud, the Supreme Court silently used the concept of Indian character to define Indian country before the United States Solicitor General coined the term. The most consistent consideration of the Court in diminishment cases is that of Indian character. The district county court reasoned that through the 1891 act that opened the reservation, the tribe had sold or relinquished the land on which the acts of neglect took place. The state submitted lengthy appendixes to demonstrate that the commissioner of Indian affairs believed the intent of the Dawes Act was to diminish reservations.
