"Indian" land is a meaningless term. When the Sioux fought with the Anishnabe over the Great Plains, whom the Anishnabe occupied earlier than the Sioux, who des

"Indian" land is a meaningless term. When the Sioux fought with the Anishnabe over the Great Plains, whom the Anishnabe occupied earlier than the Sioux, who deserves that land? Do we owe reparations to the Sioux or to the Anishnabe? Presumptively, another tribe controlled that territory before the Anishnabe. There never was this concept of "owned, stable land" until modern times. The way of the world was more like you only got to keep what you could defend. This is why Europe is dotted with massive castles. 1000 years ago, a Viking party could end your town's existence in a single raid. This map is not representative of what is "theirs by treaty". This map is a rough outline of rough territories (some notably overlapping among the individual tribes) from some arbitrary point in the past. It's not relevant in the year 2020, sorry to say. No more so than a map of individual territories of the Germanic tribes of 200 years ago. The native American tribes do enjoy semi-autonomy in various territories across the U.S. and have even contributed to the development of the United States, with native Americans fighting alongside all the other races in nearly every war we've ever engaged in, including the Civil War, Spanish-American War, World War I, and World War II. They are U.S. citizens and part of this country. Rewinding the clock 200 years is not helpful or productive.