Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement

Part of a series on the
Law of Connecticut
Sources of law Constitution of Connecticut Connecticut General Statutes
Legal history Alexander v. Yale American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission Blue Laws (Connecticut) Boddie v. Connecticut Cantwell v. Connecticut Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement Connecticut v. Doehr Geer v. Connecticut Griswold v. Connecticut History of the Connecticut Constitution Fundamental Orders of Connecticut Loewe v. Lawlor Mohegan Indians v. Connecticut New Haven Black Panther trials New York v. Connecticut Palko v. Connecticut Trial of Thomas Hogg United States v. The Amistad
Judiciary Connecticut Supreme Court Connecticut Superior Court Connecticut Appellate Court Connecticut Probate Courts United States District Court for the District of Connecticut
WikiProject Connecticut
v t e

The Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement was an Indian Land Claims Settlement passed by the United States Congress in 1983.^[1] The settlement act ended a lawsuit by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe to recover 800 acres of their 1666 reservation in Ledyard, Connecticut. The state sold this property in 1855 without gaining ratification by the Senate. In a federal land claims suit, the Mashantucket Pequot charged that the sale was in violation of the Nonintercourse Act that regulates commerce between Native Americans and non-Indians.^[2]

The settlement act appropriated $900,000 to buy the disputed lands and transferred those lands and the state reservation in trust to the Department of Interior of the federal government. The settlement act permits the state of Connecticut to exercise civil and criminal, but not regulatory, jurisdiction over the lands. Gaining federal recognition and sovereign control of their land enabled the Mashantucket Pequot to develop gaming on their reservation, specifically, the Foxwoods Resort Casino. It is the largest casino in the world by revenue and floor space, and by 2007 was the most profitable. It has struggled financially in the second decade of the 21st century.^[3]