The Disenrollment wave underway by Nevada’s Te-Moak Tribal Council disputed has ignited a passionate debate within the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada, raising fundamental questions about tribal membership, constitutional rights, and the very definition of identity. This article delves into the complexities of this ongoing controversy, exploring the historical context, the arguments presented by both sides, and the potential ramifications for the future of the tribe.
As of 2003, the Te-Moak Tribe boasted an enrollment of 2,448 members. However, a series of disenrollment actions have dramatically altered the tribal landscape. An estimated 413 members, approximately 17% of the tribe, were disenrolled in the initial wave. Now, a further disenrollment wave, initiated by the Te-Moak Tribal Council, threatens to remove an additional 300 individuals from the tribal rolls. If realized, this would bring the total disenrollment to roughly 29% of the tribe, a significant reduction that has triggered widespread concern and opposition. The Disenrollment wave underway by Nevada’s Te-Moak Tribal Council disputed needs federal intervention.
The controversy reached a boiling point in early 2012. On January 23, 2012, Lois Whitney and Myron Tybo penned a letter to the Te-Moak Tribal Council in Elko, Nevada, outlining a series of grievances related to the enrollment process. Their letter referenced a meeting held just two days prior, on January 21, 2012, where enrollment issues were discussed at length. According to Whitney and Tybo, a “majority of the people in attendance expressed that the enrollment committee altered their family enrollment,” an action they deemed “unconstitutional and a violation.” The letter served as a formal call for the Tribal Council to launch a comprehensive investigation into its enrollment procedures, addressing what they perceived as fundamental flaws in the system.
In their communication, Whitney and Tybo invoked the Tribal Council’s responsibility to "promote the welfare of ourselves and descendants," arguing that the Council and Enrollment Committee had instead "used malice to disenroll members." Their demands were unequivocal: the disenrollment process should be dissolved "in its entirety, including the Enrollment Committee," the Enrollment Ordinance, which they characterized as neither approved nor enforceable, should be abolished, and all members’ documents should be protected, allowing members to review their family enrollment files. They alleged that tribal members "were denied due process" and demanded the Council "immediately reinstate" all federally recognized enrolled Te-Moak Tribal members.
The gravity of the situation was further underscored by the distribution of the letter to several key figures within the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and the Department of the Interior. Copies were sent to Joe McDade of the Bureau of Indian Affairs Eastern Agency, Bryan Bowker, Area Director of the BIA’s Western Regional Office, Ken Salazaar, Secretary of the Interior, and Larry Echohawk, Assistant Secretary of the Interior, signaling a clear intention to escalate the issue to the federal level.
Parallel to the formal letter, a grassroots movement emerged in opposition to the disenrollment process. A Support Document, designed to garner 1,000 signatures, circulated among tribal members, expressing strong opposition to "altering Shoshone blood and disenrolling members." The document highlighted a February 1st, 2012, meeting where tribal members "pleaded with the Te-Moak Council to cease tribal disenrollment and reinstate members’ status." This meeting also saw a proposal for a referendum vote by the people to determine tribal membership, a resolution that was ultimately defeated by the Council, with Tribal Chairman Brian Cassadore casting the tie-breaking vote against it. The document characterized the Tribe’s current review process as "equivocal to entrapment," arguing that "denying membership cards takes away rights, privileges, and membership."
The Support Document drew its legitimacy from the Tribal Constitution’s Bill of Rights, which guarantees members the right "to seek redress of grievances." Recognizing the potential for "Tribal retaliation," the document stipulated that signatures would be held under seal, accessible only to the Secretary of the Interior. This measure highlights the deep-seated fear and mistrust that the disenrollment process has engendered within the Te-Moak community.
The heart of the matter lies in the interpretation of the Te-Moak Tribe’s membership criteria, which are rooted in blood quantum, specifically outlined in the original Constitution and By-Laws of the Te-Moak Bands of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada, approved on August 24, 1938, under the auspices of the U.S. Department of the Interior Office of Indian Affairs. Article II of the 1937 Constitution stipulates that membership "shall consist" of "[a]ll persons of at least one-quarter degree of Shoshone Indian blood whose names appear on the official census roll of the Elko Colony as of January 1, 1937," "[a]ll persons of at least one-quarter Shoshone Indian blood residing in the territory of the Bands whose names appear on the official census roll of the Carson Indian Agency as of January 1, 1937" who "make written application to the Te-Moak Western Shoshone Council," as well as "[a]ll children of at least one-quarter degree of Indian blood born to any member." The Disenrollment wave underway by Nevada’s Te-Moak Tribal Council disputed must follow constitution rules.
The 1937 Constitution also allowed for the admittance "to membership" of "any other person whose name appears on the official census roll of the Carson Indian Agency as of January 1, 1937." The Constitution further permitted the Council to cancel membership upon application by any adult person "to sever his tribal relations." Critically, the Tribal Council was granted the authority to "promulgate ordinances subject to review by the Secretary of the Interior governing adoption and compulsory loss of membership."
In 1982, the Constitution was amended, retaining the reference to "the official census roll of the Elko Indian Colony as of January 1, 1937, hereinafter called Base Roll 1." However, a significant issue arises from the fact that an Elko Indian Colony official census roll has never existed.
The Amended Tribal membership section also includes "descendants of members of the Tribe born after the effective date of this Constitution, provided, such descendants possess at least one-quarter degree Te-Moak Indian Blood" and "[a]ny person who does not appear on either Base Roll 1 or 2, who has at least one-quarter degree Shoshone Indian blood and who can establish residency for himself or his ancestry in the Te-Moak census area as of January 1, 1937."
The BIA became involved in the controversy in 2003, when members began to be disenrolled by the Te-Moak Council. The U.S. DOI BIA wrote to the Chairman, expressing concern over receiving calls and visits from individuals who, along with their children, were being disenrolled by the tribe "due to a blood degree decrease initiated by the Tribe."
Acting Superintendent Robert R. McNichols informed the Chairman that the BIA had not "received any official documentation" regarding Tribal "correction to blood degrees of individuals" and cautioned the Tribal Council that "you may be making blood degree changes without authority for those listed on the Indian Census of 1937, an official federal document." McNichols acknowledged that the Tribe could make changes to an "individual’s blood determination if a mathematical error is made or if an error is apparent on the record" but "must provide our office with documentation to support the change so that we can make an official request to the Regional Office to have the record changed." Furthermore, "all individuals and their heirs" must be notified about the correction on their blood degree and provided "with a hearing and their appeal rights prior to taking action on any disenrollment." Absent such a hearing, the tribe would be denying individuals "due process." McNichols concluded by stating, "Any action taken by the tribe illegally will not be honored by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and our records will remain the same."
A further BIA letter in August of 2005, addressed to the Acting Enrollment Officer for the Te-Moak Tribe, indicated that the Tribe’s request for 18 individual blood degree changes required additional documentation. The letter cautioned that "Because blood degree changes may have an adverse effect on numerous descendants involved; all persons who would be affected by the changes should be notified by the tribe in writing of the change being considered and given the opportunity to show evidence why the change should or should not be made."
The BIA emphasized that as the Te-Moak Tribe "does not have an official base roll or a reconstructed base roll the Tribe does not have the authority to change any individual’s blood degrees that are listed on the Northeastern Nevada Indian Census of January 1, 1937" which is "the official record of the Bureau of Indian Affairs" and that all blood degree requests for changes must be approved by the BIA "prior to the Tribe changing their official records."
In 2008, further correspondence from the BIA to the Chairman stated that "individuals are enrolled under the laws that are in effect at the time the application is filed," meaning that new membership requirements contained in the amended Constitution would "affect only those individuals who submit an application on or after the date of approval of the new membership provisions."
Joe McDade of the BIA in Elko, himself a Te-Moak Tribal member, acknowledged the BIA’s concerns regarding the disenrollment, stating, "I’m not really sure that that process isn’t a Tribal issue providing they’re not doing it violating people’s rights or in conflict of their Constitution. If they’re doing it in violation of people’s rights and in violation of their Constitution then there’s probably going to be an issue with that. The problem comes in interpretation: what the Tribal Council interprets as being what their Constitution says and what other entities say it is, that’s where the problem comes in."
McDade supported the statements made by McNichols in his 2003 letter but noted, "The Tribe has a different interpretation sometimes than what the Bureau has." Regarding allegations that the Tribe was contacting people and demanding the return of membership cards under threat of litigation without BIA confirmation of disenrollment criteria, McDade stated, "All of their enrollment meetings are closed meetings, I think; and it’s difficult to determine what happens. We haven’t seen anything official here on any of the actions that they’ve done." He further clarified that the BIA’s involvement would only occur if they were notified of changes to the official blood quantum listed on the census rolls, as those are federal records.
Internal divisions within the Te-Moak Tribe have further complicated the disenrollment issue. The Council is required to have resolutions of support from all the Bands, including the Battle Mountain and South Fork Bands, to act on disenrollment. However, the South Fork Band "voted in favor of a resolution in opposition of the disenrollment by the Te-Moak Tribal Council of Western Shoshone" in 2006, demanding that the Te-Moak Council "stop and desist any further actions of disenrollment of the Te-Moak Tribal members" and resolving that disenrolled members should be re-enrolled "back to their original status as members of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone Indians of Nevada." Similarly, the Battle Mountain Band Council issued resolutions opposing the "disenrollment procedures of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone" on December 14, 2007, and May 6, 2010.
Western Shoshone members have expressed concern that the Enrollment Committee is applying membership criteria retroactively, potentially violating the United States Constitution, which forbids ex post facto laws. Disenrollments are reportedly occurring due to challenges to blood degree, with some members claiming that the Committee is considering only one side of their parentage, even when both parents are Western Shoshone. Some members have received letters threatening criminal charges if they do not return tribal membership cards.
Rhonda Hicks, who was disenrolled along with her daughter, described her interactions with Enrollment Committee members as "really rude," suggesting that disenrollment decisions are influenced by personal biases. She also noted the oddity of her daughters being disenrolled while her son was not.
Bernice Lalo estimates that approximately 80% of the Battle Mountain Western Shoshone have been disenrolled, while the Enrollment Committee cites confidentiality as the reason for not releasing the names of disenrolled individuals. Lalo urged the BIA to consult with the Newe people to prevent the tribe from being "written into extinction."
Myron Tybo has questioned the rationale behind the disenrollments, asserting that they violate members’ rights and contradict the Te-Moak Constitution. He emphasized that the Constitution only allows for voluntary relinquishment of membership and that disenrolled members have not received official notification from the Department of the Interior. Tybo also challenged the concept of a distinct "Te-Moak blood," arguing that it is not federally recognized.
In response to inquiries regarding the disenrollment process, Tribal Office Enrollment Officer Sharla Dick referred the matter to Tribal Manager Pat Stevens, who in turn stated that only the Chairman could provide information. Chairman Cassadore has not yet responded to requests for comment.
Disenrolled Western Shoshone Lois Whitney has characterized disenrollment as "a tribal genocide against their own people." She detailed how the tribe allegedly discounted portions of her and her family’s Shoshone blood quantum, ultimately leading to their disenrollment. Whitney objects to the emphasis on blood degrees, arguing that it reduces individuals to "pedigree, like animals."
The Disenrollment wave underway by Nevada’s Te-Moak Tribal Council disputed is not a tribal issue but needs federal intervention.