First Nations Journal has published that Haskell Indian Nations University is created by Congress and must be operated in accordance with statutory law as ruled in the Learning Resources, Inc. vs Trump supreme court tariff decision. Haskell Indian Nations University is a federal institution created by the federal government to provide Indian treaty fiduciary trust responsibilities for Indian education. Haskell is totally dependent upon the federal government for financial operation and maintenance. The U S Department of Interior Secretary submits the Haskell budget to Congress for approval.
Haskell Indian Nations University is a federal institution as cited in Jane Doe v. Haskell Indian Nations University, et al. The supreme court tariff ruling is fundamentally about limits on executive discretion. These are the same structural principles behind: Morton v. Ruiz (1974): agencies cannot deny benefits based on unpublished rules; Cobell v. Salazar: agencies cannot manage trust assets without statutory authority or transparency; Navajo Nation v. U.S. (2003/2009): the Executive cannot create trust obligations unless Congress has clearly authorized them.
The Department of Interior Secretary and subordinate Haskell trustees do not understand the principles of federal accountability. Cobell, Ruiz, and the tariff ruling all share a common theme. The federal government must act within the law, transparently, and with fidelity to statutory duties. The Haskell Board of Trustees loud silence to federal budget cuts and hiring freezes is a breach of duty in the protection of Haskell Indian beneficiaries’ rights. The Haskell trustees lack competence in fiduciary trust guardian responsibility to Indian wards who are totally dependent upon the federal government. Cherokee nation v. Georgia (1831). The Haskell trustees turn a ‘blind eye to the rights of Indian beneficiaries at Haskell. The Haskell trustees recognize the rights of Indian people but do not enforce them. Indian people pay the price in breach of duty trust responsibility to Indian people.
The Learning Resources, Inc. v Trump supreme court tariff ruling cannot impose hiring freezes, budget restrictions, or program cuts based on internal memos or unpublished guidance. The Executive hiring freeze and staff cuts to Haskell in 2025 were devastating. The U S Bureau of Indian Education (BIE)cannot reinterpret the Haskell charter, the Snyder Act, or the Tribally Controlled Colleges and Universities Assistance Act to reduce obligations. The Higher Learning Commission on June 26, 2025, placed Haskell in “Accredited on Notice” and alarming loss of accreditation. It is inconceivable that the Haskell Board of Trustees can meet HLC standards due to Executive hiring freezes, federal budget cuts and chronic underfunding by Congress.
Haskell Indian Nations University operates under severe financial constraints often described as a “survival budget” or “survival mode” due to chronic underfunding and, more recently severe federal budget cuts. As a unique, tuition-free federally operated institution, it faces constant fiscal instability and unsustainability. The closure of Haskell is imminent, and the failed federal trust treaty Indian education obligation is a “Broken Promise.
The federal government created, operates and controls both Haskell Indian Nations University (HINU) and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute (SIPI). Haskell and SIPI are the only two post-secondary institutions in the United States that are directly run and funded by the federal government. First Nations Journal recommends that from the recent federal government of more than $175 billion in tariff presents a rare opportunity to address one of the longest-standing and most underfunded obligations in the United States: the education of Native American peoples. For more than two centuries, Congress has affirmed—through treaties, statutes and trust-responsibility doctrine—that Indian education is not a discretionary program but a binding federal commitment. Yet the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE) tribal colleges and federally operated institutions such as Haskell Indian Nations University and Southwestern Indian Polytechnic (SIPI) continue to operate under chronic shortfalls that undermine student success and tribal self-determination.
Allocating even a modest portion of the tariff revenue to Indian education would honor existing federal obligations while producing measurable national benefits. These funds could stabilize core academic programs, rebuild aging infrastructure, expand culturally grounded curriculum and strengthen tribal workforce development pipelines in health, technology, environmental stewardship, and public service. Investments of this kind are not new spending—they are overdue fulfillment of promises the United States has already made.
The supreme court ruling in the Learning Resource, Inc. vs Trump reaffirmed that the Executive cannot invent new powers. The tariff ruling is fundamentally about limits on executive discretion. That is the same structure behind:
- Morton v. Ruiz (1974) agencies cannot deny benefits based on unpublished rules.
- Cobell v. Salazar: agencies cannot manage trust assets without statutory authority or transparency.
- Navajo Nation v. U.S. (2003/2009): the Executive cannot create trust obligations unless Congress has clearly authorized them.
This moment calls for a principled re-alignment of federal priorities. If the nation can generate $175 billion through tariff policy, it can certainly dedicate a fraction of that amount to the communities whose lands, resources and political agreements made the United States possible in the first place. Strengthening Indian education is not charity, it is a matter of legal responsibility, economic strategy and moral clarity.
For the record, First Nations Journal therefore urges policymakers to designate a defined share of tariff revenue for Indian education with direct allocations to tribal nations, tribal colleges and universities, and federally operated institutions like Haskell and SIPI. Such an investment would advance educational equity, uphold treaties and trust commitments, and ensure that Native students—who represent the future of sovereign tribal nations—receive the quality education they are owed.
FIRST NATIONS JOURNAL
M’gwitch, 🪶
Steve Cadue
Kickapoo Nation Kansas
Leave a Reply