Indigenous representation within the U.S. is showing great promise: in 2024, record numbers of Native Americans ran for office alongside increased voter participation and activism. Yet, Trump’s plans to impinge on Native rights would upend the future of progress and policy for not just Indigenous peoples, but the entirety of the U.S. The current state of U.S. relations with Indigenous land and voters puts us in a position of questioning how the nation is truly viewed as it enters another four years of Trump. 

This article will analyze the relationship between indigenous rights and the Trump administration by first examining the historical context of Tribal-Federal relations and its implications on contemporary Indigenous affairs. Second, we will consider how indigenous political and community-centric involvement and participation have both improved representation and given space to the recognition of Indigenous knowledge. Third, we will look at how policy initiatives that uplift Indigenous philosophies and Native rights constructively benefit the American public as a whole. Fourth, we will examine how misleading Indigenous voter data is used to manipulate narratives and exploit resources for the Trump administration’s gain. Fifth, we will summarize how Trump’s plans to redesign, destroy, and defund minority and climate-centered initiatives put Indigenous peoples in further danger and risk disintegrating Tribal-Federal relations. Finally, we will ultimately argue that indigenous rights are at a crucial turning point under the Trump administration and that the continuation of indigenous representation is indicative of the health of the nation on a domestic and international level.

Historical Background and the State of Indigenous Rights

The U.S. government’s involvement with Tribes and Tribal leaders has been a historically tense relationship. Many members from Indigenous governments have felt that the U.S.—primarily the presidency—has left them without the Tribal rights and sovereignty the federal government promised them through treaties during the last century and a half. Under Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC), Tribal nations ought to be notified and consulted for projects that involve the usage and involvement of Tribal land, resources, and culture [1]. FPIC falls under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The U.S. originally opposed adopting the U.N. Declaration, but later adopted it three years after its initial proposal. U.S. leaders at the time recognized that the rights of indigenous peoples had to be treated with recognition out of an ethical and moral responsibility. However, to this day, the declaration is still not recognized as a legally binding law at the international level within the U.S. [2]. Despite the adoption from an ethical standpoint, informed discussions between Tribal leaders and nations had only made minimal headway in resolving multi-generational harm to Indigenous rights and sovereignty. However, the Biden administration and the Federal government’s efforts pre-Donald Trump to prioritize Indigenous rights and knowledge stood as a sign of progress. 

Participation In and Outside the Polls

Native Americans showed increased participation and political involvement ahead of the Trump Presidency. Native American voters, who only gained birthright citizenship under the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, have historically had a low voter turnout due to various factors, such as the inability to send mail-in ballots and inaccessible polling stations [3]. Native Americans are not considered to be an essential voter group; therefore, they are usually neglected in election coverage. Traditionally, Indigenous voters do not see a benefit for the overall American Indian population and, in particular, do not believe there is potential for improving the quality of life within reservations [4]. The lack of faith in the government has been particularly exacerbated by years of the American political system failing to address growing disparities in inflation and land protections. 

However, there has been a political shift in the last several election cycles. Record numbers of Indigenous candidates were on the ballot in 2024 and showed an overall boost in representation. The majority of these candidates and representatives ran within the Democratic Party [5]. With an increase in representation came more Indigenous voices on the federal and state levels. These representatives not only promoted Indigenous voices, but also sought to unite all American people. Former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland of the Biden Administration pursued many initiatives for Indigenous Peoples and opened doors for new Indigenous platforms in D.C. [6]. The Biden Administration also made significant headway for Indigenous peoples during its term. It allowed the principle of Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), which is the traditional oversight of Indigenous ancestral knowledge and land practices, to be used in federal research and policy efforts in 2022 [7]. The U.S. Council on Environmental Quality also included the protection of sacred areas as well as sections of writing on Indigenous environmental knowledge in the National Environmental Policy Act regulations. Following the increased prioritization of Indigenous land practices and knowledge in policy and regulations, the Department of the Interior officially integrated TEK’s principles with the Public Lands Rule, which was proposed by the Biden administration [8].

In 2024 alone, there were 170 Native Americans and Native Hawaiians on the ballot. Advance Native Political Leadership, an Indigenous-led research foundation, found that there were 347 elected officials who openly identified as Indigenous compared to the 519,000 total elected officials in the country [9]. This figure would have to reach 17,000 representatives to represent the Native American population proportionally [10]. Native politicians have increased by 300 percent in the last 30 years, largely at the state level, which has assisted in the follow-through of many progressive policies that serve the entire state and local communities as a whole [11]. Oklahoma’s Native Caucus has passed substantial legislation for economic development and government relations. The significance of Indigenous influence within U.S. politics at the state and federal level is the combining of public interests that aim to sustain communities as a whole. Principles that Native representatives may use often involve Indigenous philosophies and principles. Tribes, for instance, are federally recognized as sovereign states, but still benefit from having the same rights as American citizens, which has bridged relations between the Federal government’s institutions and inter-Tribal government systems [12].

How Indigenous Initiatives Prioritize the U.S. 

Many Indigenous Representatives have run on land protection, environmental policy, economic development, and public safety platforms—issues that can create bonds between Indigenous and non-Indigenous legislators alike. Ultimately, these legislators have taken the tragedy and generational trauma associated with catastrophic genocide and the displacement of Indigenous peoples to curate a message and mission intended to rebuild through joint community connections and progress. By advocating for Indigenous needs on a state level, Indigenous issues gain traction and create constructive policy initiatives that enhance accountability. A larger federal benefit of Indigenous representation was promoted by the former Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland. Haaland was the first Indigenous person appointed to the Cabinet and specifically to a department that has notoriously mistreated the rights of Indigenous peoples [13]. By having sovereignty, Tribal members can retain a connection to their land and culture while still being able to exist outside of the lines of their reservation. Otherwise, many Tribal members would not be able to support themselves by having off-reservation jobs, having access to education, or expansive medical resources [14]. For example, only 1 in 10 Native individuals have a bank account due to proximity limitations, while over 80 percent of Natives do not possess a Bachelor’s degree [15]. Sovereignty has also furthered efforts toward ethical education surrounding the history of the U.S through the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act committees, which maintain ongoing accountability [16].

Manipulation of a Population

Increased representation at the state level is in part due to increased voter turnout among Native Americans. The importance of the Native Vote would not have been amplified had Indigenous representation on the state and federal levels not been present. Historically, Native voters have felt that regardless of election results, their needs and issues would continue to go unfulfilled and cause a massive drought in Indigenous politics. During the 2024 elections, Trump and Harris prioritized Native voter groups in Arizona, Michigan, South Carolina, and Nevada on the campaign trail. However, due to underreporting, the rarely discussed Native vote showed a stark conservative shift toward Trump with a 65 percent shift [17]. Post-election data for Native Americans is heavily debated, as more prioritization of accurate Indigenous data collection is needed to acquire more well-rounded results. The increased importance of Native American votes is believed to bring more representation, progressive policy, and voting power for progressive-led efforts. In reality, fact-checked statistics about the Native vote indicate that 57 percent of Native voters voted for Harris [18]. More accurate statistics were only possible because polling researchers cared to investigate the Indigenous population and their voter turnout on a more in-depth level. This was achieved by citing specific Tribal nations rather than grouping all Indigenous people into a homogenous group, which subsequently diluted the significance of their votes.  

Misleading voting data has since been utilized to back the Trump administration’s bold arguments to dismantle key systems that Indigenous land practices and policies have been protecting. Project 2025 lays out plans to extract major resources from Native Lands and completely reorder structures in Tribal lands, including education funding, conservation efforts, and overall land protections [19]. The conservative uptick in political power shows a concerning rise in corporate greed and a willingness to subvert and manipulate minority voices. In doing so, the Trump administration’s vision of large-scale authoritarianism and wealth and resource extraction starts with dismantling key components of government relations. Key components of this vision include the Tribal sovereignty that allows lands to be connected and communities to flourish. 

What is at Risk?

The Trump administration’s blatant apathy toward an influential and key population of voters, who have upheld the bonds of our nation’s history since its beginning, shows how much they are willing to diminish to uplift themselves and their goals. To revert back to the notion that the Indigenous person no longer exists and is a forgotten image of our past is to ignore the contributions that they have and continue to make to the well-being of our country, such as through ecological, governmental, and community-organizing knowledge. When the sovereignty of Indigenous peoples is in jeopardy, so too is the well-being and quality of life for everyone. Yet, Trump’s actions put Indigenous people further at risk. In the hurricane that has been Trump’s onslaught of executive orders, he has sought to gut over a century of legal precedent for birthright citizenship and overhaul land rights for Native Americans [20]. In recent ICE raids, members of the Navajo Nation were detained by ICE and questioned about their status as  U.S citizens [21]. The Trump administration cites Elks v. Wilkins from 1884 to defend its stance on preventing the rescinding of Tribal membership for U.S. citizenship. John Elks was a Native American man who wanted to rescind his Tribal membership to gain U.S. citizenship. The Supreme Court denied his claim by arguing that Indigenous peoples under the Fourteenth Amendment were not citizens and thus could not vote. 

However, the Elks v. Wilkins case was effectively overturned by the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924 and, thus, no longer holds legal precedent [22]. The alarming acts have struck a chord in Indigenous communities, and the illegitimacy of the White House’s argument has not gone unseen. In a recent Navajo Council meeting, representatives shared their concerns, reasserting that to be Native is to be more American than America itself, a belief shared by many Indigenous peoples. In the same committee meeting, Delegate Eugenia Charles-Newton asserted that ICE agents attempting to detain people who have possessed citizenship for over 100 years would “have to wait” [23].

Decreasing sovereignty would allow the increased privatization of land for corporate use by allowing big businesses to start leasing Native lands for profit more easily. With the onset of DEI programs ending across the country, the programs available between Tribes and Indigenous institutions—some that are federally funded—risk being cut. The steep decrease in program opportunities puts Indigenous students and professionals at a disadvantage as avenues of assistance narrow, which would thereby force them to work wherever possible [24]. Lifting land protections allows for utilization of land and labor in Indigenous communities, thereby decreasing sovereignty and further eliminating the Tribal-Federal connections that Indigenous peoples have painstakingly built for years. 

Surviving Through the Presidency

The actions the Trump administration has taken show how the new era of Washington plans to cut burgeoning connections with Tribal relations and contributions. The ignorance of Trump, his advisors, and all that stand behind him also exemplifies how their visions of “democracy” and progress for the U.S are out of touch with reality. Native communities are willing to fight back, but the awareness of Indigenous needs must live on within the next four years on a higher representative level in order to retain traction in the eyes of a threatening presidency. 

A country’s longevity should be based on its ability not simply to profit but to represent its people and the history that comes with them. The very foundations of the U.S. are built on the backbones of minority labor in addition to minority philosophies. In fact, the Iroquois contributed significantly to the U.S. Constitution. Canassetego, the leader of the Onondaga, presented their Great Law of Peace to the Continental Congress in 1776 [25]. Benjamin Franklin was heavily influenced by the words of Canassetego and continued to advocate for the implementation of their philosophies. The Great Law of Peace continues to live on in our Constitutional processes, such as checks and balances, impeachment, and multiple government branches [26]. In effect, our continuation of cultural and historical accountability has a stake in our sustainability.

The underlying systems that we have utilized from Indigenous culture and that benefit us on a contemporary level can only continue if we maintain and work to increase representation. In a threatening time for every minority group, pushing for the empowerment and awareness of Indigeneity contributes more to the American cause as a whole. Time and time again, conservatives have threatened to put the U.S. back into a bubble: a contradicting fantasy of simultaneous isolationist and imperialist strategy that ultimately harms everyone [27]. Turning the clock back is not possible, but pushing the notion of an entire population belonging to America’s past—especially as a group that has no political hold and no rights to the land that has always been theirs—remains a steadfast political tactic that Trump sees no problem in exploiting. Yet, Indigenous people and their philosophies have brought communities together repeatedly. 

The silver lining, if any, is that the Native population knows how to mobilize with or without the Federal government based on generations of experience. Both domestic and international Tribal networks assist in connecting the Indigenous population to communicate and maintain advocacy efforts. Indigenous Internationalism is a diplomatic and political-strategic philosophy that transcends borders to form bonds of solidarity with other minorities and Indigenous populations. This philosophy helps challenge discriminatory practices on a global scale [28]. Indigenous Internationalism has been implemented on a worldwide scale through networks such as the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, which works toward documentation rights and community development, and the Indigenous Connectivity Institute, which advocates for infrastructure and internet accessibility [29]. Efforts of Indigenous advocacy used across borders keep networks of strength and accountability alive, ultimately promoting equity for the greater good of large-scale populations. Recently, the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs made several significant accomplishments that have served as the catalyst for climate preservation and research policy change in Asia, Latin America, and Africa [30]. Grassroots efforts are alive and well, but more coverage on a national level would increase the benefits.

A privileged history that only represents the majority is no history at all. Negating the undeniable contributions and ways in which Indigenous people have given to policy and political strategy keeps the U.S. from continuing relations even outside of the country. If the U.S. does not keep up with Indigenous representation, the government will only grow further out of touch. The next 4 years of the Trump presidency will risk America’s reputation as a country built on growth. Now more than ever, an essential part of our growth isn’t simply about maximizing capital but maintaining our accountability: accountability to the people and the land. Indigenous advocacy efforts show no signs of stopping. Protests will continue, but so too will suffering. The more we choose to forget our past by erasing the present population of what should be a key voting group, the more we hurt the progress of our nation.