OCR Specification focus:
‘US citizenship (1924) and New Deal reforms adjusted policy and rights.’
The granting of US citizenship to Native Americans in 1924 and the New Deal policies of the 1930s reshaped their political, legal and socio-economic status, altering federal–tribal relations.
The 1924 Indian Citizenship Act
Background and Context
By the early 20th century, Native Americans had endured decades of policies aimed at assimilation and land dispossession. The Dawes Act of 1887 had already attempted to dismantle tribal structures through allotment, fragmenting communal landholding and pushing individuals towards Euro-American agricultural practices. Yet, by the 1920s, Native Americans remained politically marginalised and socially disadvantaged.
The Granting of Citizenship
The Indian Citizenship Act (1924), also known as the Snyder Act, extended US citizenship to all Native Americans born within the territorial limits of the United States.
President Calvin Coolidge stands with Native delegates at the White House shortly after the Indian Citizenship Act became law. The image illustrates the contemporaneous federal symbolism around Native citizenship. Note: the Library of Congress records that an original caption misidentified the specific tribal affiliation. Source
Indian Citizenship Act (1924): Federal law granting US citizenship to all Native Americans born in the United States, regardless of tribal affiliation.
Before 1924, many Native Americans had gained citizenship piecemeal, either by allotment, military service, or special treaties. The Act marked the first universal recognition of their legal status as American citizens.
Motivations Behind the Act
Several factors drove this shift:
Military service: Thousands of Native Americans served in the First World War, strengthening calls for recognition of their loyalty and rights.
Progressive Era ideals: Reformers sought to integrate Native Americans more fully into US society, framing citizenship as a civilising and protective measure.
Pressure from advocacy groups: Organisations such as the Society of American Indians lobbied for greater rights and recognition.
Implications and Limitations
While the Act conferred formal political rights — including the right to vote — implementation was uneven. Some states, particularly in the West, used legal mechanisms to disenfranchise Native Americans until well into the mid-20th century. Moreover, citizenship did not resolve issues of land loss, poverty, or cultural suppression. Many Native Americans themselves were ambivalent, seeing the Act as another step towards assimilation rather than genuine self-determination.
The New Deal and Native American Policy
Shifts in Federal Policy During the New Deal
The New Deal, launched by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in response to the Great Depression, represented a broader rethinking of the federal government’s role in society. For Native Americans, this meant a significant departure from previous policies of assimilation and allotment.
The Role of John Collier and the Indian Reorganisation Act
A key architect of this new approach was John Collier, appointed Commissioner of Indian Affairs in 1933.
John Collier addresses the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, emblematic of the federal shift toward tribal self-government that culminated in the Indian Reorganisation Act (1934). This image contextualises New Deal policymaking and the federal–tribal dialogue discussed in the notes. (The photo is from 1940 but directly depicts the same official leading the reforms.) Source
Collier criticised the assimilationist policies of previous decades and advocated for cultural preservation and tribal self-governance.
Indian Reorganisation Act (1934): Landmark New Deal legislation reversing allotment, restoring some tribal lands, and promoting tribal self-government and cultural autonomy.
The Indian Reorganisation Act (IRA), often called the ‘Indian New Deal’, was the centrepiece of this policy shift. It sought to:
End the allotment process and halt further fragmentation of tribal land.
Restore some land to tribal ownership and encourage the acquisition of additional land.
Re-establish tribal governments, enabling Native communities to draft their own constitutions.
Support cultural revival and education in Native languages and traditions.
Economic and Social Measures
Beyond the IRA, broader New Deal programmes also reached Native communities. Agencies such as the Civilian Conservation Corps – Indian Division (CCC-ID) provided employment and infrastructure improvements on reservations. Initiatives addressed poverty, healthcare, and education, though often unevenly and under severe financial constraints.
Impacts on Sovereignty and Identity
The New Deal era marked a turning point in federal–tribal relations. Tribal governments gained formal recognition and some degree of self-determination, allowing Native Americans to exercise greater control over their affairs. Cultural policies supported the revitalisation of traditions previously suppressed under assimilationist regimes.
However, the IRA’s implementation was not uniform. Some tribes rejected its provisions, wary of continued federal control or sceptical of imposed governance structures that did not align with traditional systems. Others found the promised land restitution limited, and many economic problems persisted.
Continuities and Changes from 1924 to the New Deal
Expansion of Legal Rights
The 1924 Citizenship Act and the New Deal reforms both expanded the legal and political framework within which Native Americans operated. Citizenship theoretically offered participation in democratic processes, while the New Deal reintroduced tribal sovereignty as a legitimate political entity within the federal system.
Limits of Reform
Despite these advances, many obstacles remained:
Voting barriers: State-level resistance delayed the exercise of suffrage rights for decades.
Economic hardship: Chronic poverty and unemployment were not eradicated by New Deal programmes.
Cultural tensions: Federal involvement continued to shape Native governance and identity, often clashing with indigenous traditions.
Long-Term Significance
Together, the 1924 Citizenship Act and New Deal policies marked a transition from outright assimilationist strategies to more pluralistic approaches acknowledging Native identity and autonomy. They laid the groundwork for later self-determination policies of the 1960s and 1970s and contributed to ongoing debates about sovereignty, land rights, and cultural preservation.
The period between 1924 and the New Deal was thus a complex chapter in Native American history — one of partial inclusion, cautious reform, and persistent struggle. Citizenship extended legal recognition, while the New Deal redefined federal relations, but both fell short of fully resolving the deep structural challenges facing Native communities.
FAQ
While the federal government granted citizenship, many state governments resisted extending full political rights. Several Western states introduced legal barriers such as literacy tests, residency requirements, and claims that Native Americans were “under guardianship,” which were used to deny them the vote.
It was not until later court challenges — notably Harrison v. Laveen (1948) in Arizona — that many of these restrictions were overturned, allowing more Native Americans to exercise their voting rights.
Although John Collier was a key architect, Native American leaders were not passive recipients. Many tribal representatives engaged in consultations, provided testimony before congressional committees, and debated the merits of the Indian Reorganisation Act (IRA).
Some leaders supported the reforms as a path to sovereignty, while others criticised them for imposing Western political structures on traditional governance systems, revealing diverse opinions within Native communities.
Not all tribes accepted the IRA’s provisions. Concerns included:
Fear of increased federal control disguised as self-governance.
Dislike of imposed constitutional frameworks that did not reflect traditional leadership structures.
Doubts about whether promised land restoration would materialise.
Approximately 77 tribes voted against adopting IRA constitutions, showing significant scepticism despite broader federal intentions.
The New Deal marked a shift from suppressing Native languages and traditions to supporting cultural revitalisation. Federal funding was directed toward schools that taught Native history, culture, and languages, reversing decades of assimilationist boarding school policies.
Cultural projects under the Works Progress Administration (WPA) and other programmes documented oral traditions and art, helping preserve Indigenous heritage during a time of transition.
Together, these measures laid the foundation for future self-determination policies. Citizenship provided a legal basis for political participation, while the New Deal recognised tribal governments as legitimate political entities.
These developments influenced later legislation, such as the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (1975), which expanded tribal control over federal programmes and further advanced sovereignty and cultural autonomy.
Practice Questions
Question 1 (2 marks):
What was the main purpose of the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924?
Mark Scheme:
1 mark for identifying that it granted US citizenship to all Native Americans born within the territorial limits of the United States.
1 additional mark for explaining the purpose — for example, to recognise their contribution to US society (such as wartime service) or to further assimilation into American political life.
Question 2 (6 marks):
Explain how the New Deal changed federal government policy towards Native Americans in the 1930s.
Mark Scheme:
Award up to 6 marks based on the following criteria:
1 mark for identifying that the New Deal marked a shift away from previous assimilationist policies.
1 mark for mentioning John Collier and his role as Commissioner of Indian Affairs.
1 mark for correctly naming the Indian Reorganisation Act (1934).
1 mark for explaining that the Act ended allotment and aimed to restore tribal lands.
1 mark for noting that it promoted tribal self-government, allowing Native Americans to draft their own constitutions.
1 mark for mentioning social and economic measures such as the Civilian Conservation Corps – Indian Division (CCC-ID), which provided employment and improved infrastructure on reservations.
