The federal purchase monopoly suppresses Native American land prices.

Evidence

This case created a distinction between the right of occupancy and the right of ownership that persists in U.S. jurisprudence concerning Native American lands. Economists have pointed out that limiting the right to purchase Native American land to the federal government allows it to be sold at the lowest possible prices because there is no competition. — Supreme Court of the United States (Marshall Court, 1823), Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh,…, 10

Categorization

• XREF: Connects directly to Eco-Justice’s settler-colonialism theme and to property law’s treatment of Marshall Court land precedents; the ‘no competition drives down price’ economics links to why dispossession was structurally profitable. — connects to: Courts voided private purchases of Indian land as unmarketable title. — Supreme Court of the United States (Marshall Court, 1823), Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. M’Intosh,…, 5; The Supreme Court denied American Indians the right to sell their land.; US courts have stripped Indigenous land rights through adverse rulings — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations: How Building a…, 1199 (+1 more)
• QUESTION: Worth chasing who these economists are and whether the federal monopoly argument appears in later doctrinal critiques.
• DEEPTHINKING: The occupancy/ownership split is the doctrinal core this whole polyad hinges on, and the economist’s point exposes the material incentive hidden inside a putatively abstract legal form.

Related

• Courts voided private purchases of Indian land as unmarketable title. (similarity 0.88)
• The Supreme Court gave Indians only occupancy rights, not land title. (similarity 0.82)
• US courts stripped indigenous land claims through takings and laches rulings (similarity 0.81)
• Natives were rightful occupants but lacked power to sell their land. (similarity 0.81)
• US courts have stripped Indigenous land rights through adverse rulings (similarity 0.81)
• Johnson v. McIntosh denied Indians property ownership rights (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• The Supreme Court denied American Indians the right to sell their land. #complicates (0.72)
• US courts stripped indigenous land claims through takings and laches rulings #qualifies (0.72) — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations, 1199
• US courts have stripped Indigenous land rights through adverse rulings #complicates (0.70) — Dorothy A. Brown, Getting to Reparations, 1199