This page was created by Hai In Jo. The last update was by Daniel G. Tracy.
Cherokee Freedmen Controversy
The incorporation of the Cherokee Nation into the United States raised new questions concerning the extent of the rights of Cherokee Freedmen. Although the Freedmen were granted Cherokee citizenship, the Nation Council’s decisions and public opinion regarding their status fluctuated over time. As more legal actions were taken to secure Freedmen’s full rights as citizens, the opposition from Cherokee citizens also increased, often centering around the concept of “Cherokee blood.” This debate reflected deeper ideological and racial tensions within Cherokee society in the nineteenth century in particular. In response, the Freedmen became more vocal in asserting their rights, even turning to the US government for assistance. With the Cherokee Nation receiving US government funding for services and social programs, the federal government increasingly influenced the resolution of this issue, challenging the notion that Cherokee identity should be solely based on bloodline. These changes prompted a reconsideration of the Black freed people who were not enrolled in the Dawes Roll and the lasting impact this omission has had on their descendants.
1907, Mar. 4—The Dawes Commission completes the rolls, resulting in three lists for Cherokees, Freedmen, and Doubtful citizens. The Dawes Roll records the blood quantum only for the Cherokees and not for the two other lists, which creates a lot of problems.1907, Nov. 16—When Oklahoma enters the Union as the forty-sixth state, the Cherokees become citizens of the state of Oklahoma, and thus citizens of the United States.
1971—Cherokee citizens and Freedmen are issued tribal citizenship cards, also known as “blue cards.” Freedmen vote in the 1971, 1975, and 1979 tribal elections.
1975—Article III of the new Constitution states that all Dawes enrollees and their descendants are citizens of the Cherokee Nation.
Contested Disenfranchisement of Freedmen
1983—Despite the new constitution establishing Cherokee citizenship for Freedmen, they are not allowed to vote in a tribal election. Letters are sent to Freedmen citizens informing them of their disenfranchisement following the tribe’s requirement that Cherokee citizens provide a Certificate Degree of Indian Blood (CDIB) card. To apply for CDIB, which grants access to tribal citizenship, health services, educational loans, and other federal benefits, “an application must be submitted along with documents that directly connect a person to an enrolled lineal ancestor who is listed on the ‘Dawes Roll’ Final Rolls of Citizens and Freedman of the Five Civilized Tribes.”1 This requirement blocks many freed people and their descendants who did not make it onto the Dawes Roll. The overemphasis on the Dawes Roll disregards the technical and procedural issues with the Roll.1992, Sept. 12—The Cherokee Nation Council passes an act to settle the policies and procedures governing the issuance of tribal membership. This act expels Freedmen from citizenship without proof of Cherokee blood. The Cherokee Freedmen whose blood quantum was not tabulated on the Dawes Roll lack physical proof. This discrimination against Freedmen continues to create issues.
2002—The Descendants of Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes Association is organized. It has been at the forefront of the fight against racial discrimination faced by the Freedmen of the Five Civilized Tribes, as well as in promoting education on the history and culture of African-descended Freedmen.
2003, Mar. 24—The Cherokees repeal the requirement for federal approval for any amendments to the tribe's constitution or a new constitution by a vote. Consequently, Freedmen descendants are not allowed to vote, even if capable of tracing their citizenship through the Freedmen rolls. In response, Cherokee Freedmen leader Marilyn Vann files suit against the Department of Interior, asserting that the Cherokee Nation prevented them from participating in the 2003 tribal elections and that the 2003 elections are invalid (Vann v. Kempthorne). The Freedmen try to nullify the results of the 2003 elections until they are permitted to vote again.
2006, Mar. 7—The Cherokee Supreme Court rules that the blood requirement is unconstitutional according to the 1975 Constitution, which did not include the words “by blood” (Allen v Cherokee Nation).
2006, Mar. 13—Principal Chief Chadwick Smith calls for a special election to change tribal citizenship requirements to limit citizenship to those who are enrollees or descendants of Cherokees by blood as listed on the Dawes Roll. While the Supreme Court’s ruling was a logical conclusion following the 1975 Cherokee Constitution, the issue was framed as a problem of political sovereignty.2 The advocates sometimes falsely conflated all Freedmen as without any “Cherokee blood” and correlated Blackness with financial dependency.3
2007, Mar. 3—In a special election, the Cherokee Nation amends its constitution to restrict tribal citizenship to those who are Cherokee, Shawnee, or Delaware by blood. This decision expels about 2,869 descendants of Cherokee Freedmen from the tribe. Over 300 affected Freedmen file a lawsuit.
2007, Aug.—US House Resolution 2824, sponsored by US Rep. Diane Watson, threatens to cut off the Cherokee Nation’s federal funds and ties with the US government if the Freedmen are not granted their citizenship rights. Watson and twenty-six fellow members of the Congressional Black Caucus write a letter to the assistant secretary of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, questioning the validity of the tribe’s special election. On one hand, this measure reveals the US government’s economic power over the Cherokee Nation. On the other hand, the intervention of the Congressional Black Caucus highlights the dispute over Cherokee Freedmen as a matter of racial dispute and the coalitional effort to fight it.
2011, Jan. 14—Judge John Cripps of the Cherokee Nation’s District Court overturns the 2007 special election, declaring it unconstitutional and reinstating the Cherokee Freedmen as citizens (Raymond Nash, et al v. Cherokee Nation Registrar).
2011, Aug. 21—The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court vacates the January 14 ruling of the Cherokee District Court, effectively terminating Freedmen’s citizenship yet again, including their right to vote. Accordingly, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development suspends $33 million in funding to the tribe.
2017, Aug. 30—The US District Court rules in favor of the Freedmen descendants and gives them full citizenship. The official ruling argues that due to the 1866 Treaty, “the freedmen’s right to citizenship does not exist solely under the Cherokee Nation Constitution and therefore cannot be extinguished solely by amending that Constitution.” The Cherokee Nation does not appeal.
2017, Sept. 1—The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court orders registration for citizenship. Accordingly, the Cherokee Nation’s Registration begins accepting and processing Freedmen descendant applications the same day. The 2007 amendment to the Cherokee Constitution that purported to limit citizenship to those who are Cherokee “by blood” is made void, granting Freedmen full rights, including the right to run for office. While this marks a triumph for Freedmen and their descendants, the rights are still limited to those who have ancestors recorded on the Dawes roll.
2021, Feb. 22—The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court rules that the tribal nation remove the phrase “by blood” from its constitution and other tribal laws. This change acknowledges that Cherokee Freedmen have the right to tribal citizenship and are now eligible to run for tribal office and access resources such as tribal health care. Also important is the fact that this decision institutes the Cherokee Nation as a multiracial nation despite the longevity of the idea of “blood” governing its tribal identity. There’s more to the Cherokee identity than just the blood.
Recently, the Cherokee Nation has been seeking judicial reparation; increasing Freedmen’s access to tribal programs that support education, employment, and welfare; declaring February as Black History Month; and holding exhibitions on the history of the Cherokee Freedmen. These measures are designed to facilitate a more vibrant social reconciliation across these communities over time.
Footnotes
- Cherokee Nation. "Tribal Registration." Cherokee Nation. Accessed February 7, 2025. https://www.cherokee.org/all-services/tribal-registration/↵
- Circe Sturm, “Race, Sovereignty, and Civil Rights: Understanding the Cherokee Freedmen Controversy,” Cultural Anthropology 29, no. 3 (2014): 575–98. ↵
- Celia E. Naylor, African Cherokees in Indian Territory: From Chattel to Citizens (University of North Carolina Press, 2008), 212.↵