My great-great-grandmother was a Cherokee Indian. You may have heard that before and possibly learned to roll your eyes at it, but it’s actually true. I normally introduce myself as a “citizen of the Cherokee Nation.” I do so for a few, very specific reasons. Largely, it is because identifying as “part Cherokee” or having a “Cherokee grandmother” understandably draws skepticism. However, the primary reason is that it centers my identity in community recognition and the legal authority of my tribe as a sovereign entity to determine who is or is not part of the nation.

Many people think of being “American Indian” as a racial classification, but the reality is much more complicated than that. There are many people who have Native American heritage. Often, that heritage is distant and poorly-known, having little impact on daily lives. These people would not fit into any racial classification as Indians, yet they frequently make that claim. Others may claim to be Native based on a combination of ancestry and cultural practice. Being American Indian, however, is primarily defined as a legal and political classification, based on the inherent sovereignty of what Chief Justice John Marshall called “domestic dependent nations.”

The U.S. government has severely limited the right of tribes to govern themselves throughout the years. In the early days after the Revolution, U.S. officials sought to deal with tribes as nations, signing treaties and governing commerce. Yet, they simultaneously sought to usurp Native land claims, sometimes using force or other forms of coercion, and attempting to “civilize,” by which I mean “assimilate by force.” Thomas Jefferson indicated that he hoped Natives would assimilate into American society, but if they would not, he suggested that tribes might need to be forcefully removed west of the Mississippi so white settlers could claim the land. Andrew Jackson carried out this ethnic cleansing with the Trail of Tears.

Decades later, following several so-called “Indian wars,” the government ended the practice of making treaties with tribes and sought to erase tribes by allotting tribal lands to individual Indians and attempting to extinguish tribal governments. This policy continued until New Deal policies ended allotment, and Congress passed the Indian Reorganization Act, allowing tribes to reconstitute, but in a limited way. It was around this time that “blood quantum,” was imposed on tribes, a concept completely foreign and contrary to Native ideas of kinship. Blood quantum is nothing more than a pseudo-scientific classification of racial purity, or “what percentage” you are, whereas kinship is based on relations and being connected to community. Despite this re-recognition of tribal governments, the U.S. government continued to limit tribes and promote assimilation through termination and relocation policies. At the same time, the government systematically removed Native children from their families and sterilized Native women.

Now, however, tribes are recognized to have the right to self-determination. Tribes once again engage with the federal government on a nation-to-nation basis. Tribal sovereignty is still limited, but tribes are now afforded more respect than they have received in over a century. Many tribes are able to define citizenship for themselves, at least to an extent. Traditionally, many tribes had forms of adoption so people outside the tribe could join. Some tribes still do this to a limited extent, but only in an honorary form. Additionally, courts ruled that the Cherokee Nation must recognize citizenship for descendants of Cherokee Freedmen, primarily descendants of workers enslaved by Cherokees prior to the U.S. Civil War. 

Federal law, however, still only recognizes tribal citizens who have “Indian blood,” documented by a “Certificate of Degree of Indian Blood” (CDIB), as “American Indians” for purposes of law. This should not be the case. It is a limitation on tribal sovereignty. Tribes should be able to recognize anyone as a citizen and even allow naturalization if they so choose. Every person legitimately connected by kinship should be entitled to citizenship in their tribe. Every tribal citizen should be recognized in all ways as “American Indians,” entitled to all the rights and privileges that affords.

Yet, there is another infringement of tribal sovereignty regarding who is an American Indian. The problem is commonly referred to as “pretendianism” in Indian Country—that is, people claiming to be Native, typically to gain some perceived or actual benefit. They do this even though they have no recognizable claim to citizenship or even an authenticated heritage. This is closely related to what some have called “Cherokee grandmother syndrome,” the common and often false belief that one is descended from a Native American ancestor, usually a “Cherokee grandmother.” 

That is not to say that actual descendants of Native Americans have no right to claim their ancestry. On the contrary, I encourage you to search out your genealogy to find out more about your ancestors. I urge you, however, to be careful how you position yourself regarding Native identity and not to claim benefits based on distant ancestry. You do not experience the systems affecting Native Americans. Appropriating Native identity perpetuates systems of oppression whereby non-Native people benefit from claims to Native ancestry while Natives are marginalized for that same identity.

This distinction between Native ancestry and tribal citizenship has serious legal implications. The United States has certain obligations under the Constitution, the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and expectations under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP), though UNDRIP has not been ratified by the United States. As with federal law, UNDRIP extols the right of Indigenous peoples to self-determination, including their right to define membership according to the customs and traditions of the community. Laws such as the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) utilize the political classification of “American Indian” to protect Indian children from being removed from their communities, which would violate the Convention on Genocide. ICWA must use this political designation of citizenship because using self-identification would render it a race-based law. All federal and tribal programs intended to comply with constitutional and international legal obligations must similarly utilize tribal citizenship to determine qualification. Centering an individual’s self-identification and claims to heritage, regardless of legitimacy, risks public perception of race-based preferential treatment. In actuality, being Native is a political status as part of a sovereign Indigenous nation that is afforded certain protections under U.S. and international law.

You cannot identify a Native American by appearance. Some Natives have stereotypical features, but many of us appear white, and others hold both Black and Native identities. Many Natives are mixed, and that is okay. No one is less Native because they are mixed. Natives can hold any racial identification because “Native American” is not primarily a racial classification, but a collective, sovereign identity. Native identity is based on community recognition of kinship ties, typically and legally expressed through tribal citizenship. 

For those who are not tribal citizens, but have kinship ties, I know this topic can be frustrating. To the disenrolled, I see you. If you believe you have kinship ties, I encourage you to search them out to know them, to know your story. I just ask you to be clear and honest about your positionality. You are not less than any tribal citizen. Social interactions may be more permissive about who is included as “Native American,” but tribal sovereignty determines the legal identity of who is an American Indian. Differences are not deficits. I want to see tribal nations claim all their kin and be able to make new kinship relations, and those are decisions to be made by sovereign communities, free from colonial expectations. And to non-Natives, this article is not permission to question anyone’s identities. You do not get to decide who is Native enough. These are issues best left to community members. However, you should ascribe value to what Natives value and amplify the voices of Natives whenever possible. But in all things, remember you are on stolen land, and we’re still here.