Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 186.
This bill accepts the request by the Lower Sioux Indian Community (Minnesota) to surrender and revoke its 1937 charter of incorporation issued under section 17 of the Indian Reorganization Act (25 U.S.C. 5124). The charter is formally revoked at the Community's request.
Progressives emphasize sovereignty and reparative governance benefits.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that clearly states the single legal action—revocation of a particular charter—and cites the relevant statutory authority.
This bill accepts the request by the Lower Sioux Indian Community (Minnesota) to surrender and revoke its 1937 charter of incorporation issued under section 17 of the Indian Reorganization Act (25 U.S.C. 5124).
The charter is formally revoked at the Community's request.
The text contains no additional substantive provisions beyond acceptance of that surrender.
Highly likely on substance because it's narrowly tailored, requested by the tribe, and imposes no fiscal burden; final steps depend on procedural approval and signature.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that clearly states the single legal action—revocation of a particular charter—and cites the relevant statutory authority. The text is concise and legally specific about which charter is revoked but provides minimal implementation, fiscal, or follow-up detail.
Progressives emphasize sovereignty and reparative governance benefits.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize sovereignty and reparative governance benefits.
Likely viewed positively as respect for tribal self-determination and tribal choices about governance.
Seen as a narrowly targeted correction allowing the Community to replace an IRA-era corporate charter with its own governance arrangements.
Treated as a technical, narrowly focused measure that honors a tribe's request while raising practical questions.
Generally supportive if legal and financial implications are clarified and transition risks are mitigated.
Likely seen as a small, permissible transfer of authority to a local actor; tolerable if it reduces federal oversight.
Might nonetheless flag legal and precedent concerns about corporate charters and obligations.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Highly likely on substance because it's narrowly tailored, requested by the tribe, and imposes no fiscal burden; final steps depend on procedural approval and signature.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize sovereignty and reparative governance benefits.
Highly likely on substance because it's narrowly tailored, requested by the tribe, and imposes no fiscal burden; final steps depend on proc…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly scoped substantive change that clearly states the single legal action—revocation of a particular charter—and cites the relevant statutory authority. The…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.