Republic of Lakotah proposal

The following people identified themselves as members of the provisional government of Lakotah:

• Russell Means, chief facilitator (died 2012)[18]
• Tegheya Kte, also called Garry Rowland (fully, Clarence Gary Anthony Rowland), facilitator[20]
• Phyllis Young, provisional government member[20]

The capital of Lakotah was not announced. The Republic of Lakotah gave its provisional capital as Porcupine, South Dakota with hopes in the long run to move administration to near Rapid City, South Dakota.[21]

Traditional range of the Siouan peoples (dark green) and the current reservations (orange).

Supporters of Lakotah argue that their assertion of sovereignty is entirely legal under "Natural, International and United States law".[24] The group emphasizes that the Republic's establishment comes from a "withdrawal" from the United States, not a secession.[13][15]

The group claims the right to withdraw, on behalf of the Lakota people, from the Treaties of Fort Laramie as a consequence of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Members argue that the decision in the case of Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553 (1903) shows that the United States Government does not adequately protect Indian rights.[22] Means cites the Enabling Act of 1889, stating that clauses protecting Indian sovereignty on the lands comprising the states where the Lakota historically reside have been ignored.[13]

In a 15 January 2008 news release, the Republic of Lakotah proposed that independence from the United States might follow a Compact of Free Association and suggested that the independence process could resemble that of the Philippines, Palau, the Federated States of Micronesia or the Marshall Islands.[10]

Russell Means stated that he intended to treat the result of the 2008 Pine Ridge Reservation Presidential election, in which he was a candidate,[25] as a "plebiscite/referendum" on Lakota independence. He lost that election 1,918 to 2,277. [26]

Lakotah's founders cite the Oglala 1974 Declaration of Continuing Independence:

The United States of America has continually violated the independent Native Peoples of this continent by Executive action, Legislative fiat and Judicial decision. By its actions, the U.S. has denied all Native people their International Treaty rights, Treaty lands and basic human rights of freedom and sovereignty. This same U.S. Government, which fought to throw off the yoke of oppression and gain its own independence, has now reversed its role and become the oppressor of sovereign Native people.[27]

The groups cite several reasons for its assertion of sovereignty, all connected to what they refer to as the "colonial apartheid" of the reservation system in the United States. The group claims that control by the United States has led to massive unemployment, poverty and disease among the Lakota people and also alleges that 150 years of U.S. administration is responsible for the statistical poverty of Lakota lands. The group claims that withdrawal from the United States will reverse these problems, and help reestablish the Lakota language and culture.[28][29] The group also claims persistent violations by the United States of their treaties with the Lakota.

Inyan Kara, in the Black Hills is a sacred mountain to the Lakota.

Another longstanding point of contention between the Lakota and the United States is the status of the Black Hills of South Dakota, which were part of Sioux reservation lands until they were taken without compensation by the US government and opened for gold mining following the collapse of the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868). In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court decision United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians awarded $105 million to eight tribes of Sioux Indians as compensation ($17.1 million for the market value of the land in 1877 and $88 million in 5% per annum simple interest between 1877 and 1980),[30][31] but the court did not award land. The tribal governments of the Lakota have refused the settlement.[32]

Rodney Bordeaux, chairman of the Rosebud Sioux, said that Rosebud Indian Reservation has no interest in joining the Republic of Lakotah and said that the Lakota Freedom Delegation never presented their plan to the tribal council.[16] Bordeaux stated that the group does not represent the Lakota people nor the support of the elected tribal governments. However, he did say that Russell Means "made some good points".[1]

Joseph Brings Plenty, chairman of the Cheyenne River Lakota, agreed that the Lakota Freedom Delegation "are not representative of the nation I represent" but would not say whether he agreed or disagreed with their goals and message, noting some value in the group's actions in raising awareness for the history of the Lakota people.[1]

The United States Department of State referred queries on the subject of Lakotah to the United States Department of the Interior, which oversees the Bureau of Indian Affairs.[37] Gary Garrison of the BIA said that the group's withdrawal "doesn't mean anything". "These are not legitimate tribal governments elected by the people ... when they begin the process of violating other people's rights, breaking the law, they're going to end up like all the other groups that have declared themselves independent — usually getting arrested and being put in jail."[1]

Regarding the government response, or lack thereof, Russell Means stated that, "I don't expect the federal government to do anything. I don't believe they even know what to do."[13]

The Alaskan Independence Party, in an announcement dated December 21, 2007, "applauded" the independent Lakota nation and granted it "full recognition".[38] The secessionist movement Second Vermont Republic has also announced its support, and encouraged other American Indian groups to similarly declare independence from the United States.[39]

Internationally, according to Russell Means, Venezuela's ambassador to the United States has stated to the group that his country cannot recognize Lakotah's independence based on Venezuela's interpretation of what the Lakotah Freedom Delegation is doing.[13]

In February 2008, the Lakotah Freedom Delegation (including Means) handed over a formal petition, asking for recognition of the Republic of Lakotah, to the embassies of Russia, Serbia, Bolivia, Venezuela, the Republic of South Africa, Ireland, France, Nicaragua, East Timor, Chile, Turkey, India, Finland, Iceland and Uruguay. The text of the petition is available online.[40]