Skip to main content
PRINT EDITION

Let Indians Decide: How Restricting Border Passage by Blood Quantum Infringes on Tribal Sovereignty

By March 1, 2021July 22nd, 2022No Comments

Abstract: American immigration laws have been explicitly racial throughout most of the country’s history. For decades, only White foreign nationals could become naturalized citizens. All racial criteria have since vanished from the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA)—all but one. Section 289 of the INA allows “American Indians born in Canada” to freely cross into the United States if they possess at least 50% blood “of the American Indian race.” Such American Indians cannot be prohibited from entering the United States and can obtain lawful permanent residence status—if they meet the blood quantum requirement. Such racialized immigration controls arbitrarily restrict cross-border Indigenous communities and have since their inception in the mid-1800s.
Indigenous communities were never confined within national borders prior to colonization, and they continue to span both the U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico borders. The free passage of these individuals is restricted by INA section 289. This Comment focuses on how the question of who is “Indian” should be defined not by the federal government based on blood quantum, but by Indigenous nations themselves. Ultimately, this Comment argues that Congress should remove the blood quantum requirement entirely and expand the free passage right to include American Indians born in Mexico.

Download the Full Article

Other Articles from WLR Print Edition

January 1, 2026 in PRINT EDITION

From the Bench to the Feed: Conflict Between Public Official Accounts and the First Amendment

Abstract: Imagine one day waking up, opening Facebook, and discovering that the official White House account blocked you because you left a comment expressing a viewpoint. In this case, your…
Read More
January 1, 2026 in PRINT EDITION

The Reasonability Rule for Medical Damages in Tort: In Defense of Chargemaster Recovery

Abstract: In a personal injury suit, Washington law requires the plaintiff to prove that their medical costs are reasonable to recover damages for those costs. Tort reform proponents attempt to…
Read More
January 1, 2026 in PRINT EDITION

Who Counts as a “Reasonable Employee”? The Third Circuit’s Bungling of Section 8(a)(1) Violations

Abstract: The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects private employees’ right to unionize and collectively bargain with their employers. Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees employees the right to self-organize…
Read More