From agency rule to written constitutions
Until the 1930s, most Apache reservations were governed day to day by federal agents. Leaders were respected within communities, but the legal power to make decisions about land, money and programs largely rested with the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Written tribal constitutions and elected councils, which are now ordinary features of Apache nations, mostly date to the reorganization period.
The Apache peoples are separate nations, so this article describes a general process and names communities only where the record is clear. Adoption dates, wording and later revisions differ, and readers should consult each nation’s own documents for specifics.
The Indian Reorganization Act
The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, sometimes called the Wheeler-Howard Act, ended the allotment of tribal lands and allowed tribes to organize governments and incorporate for business. It was associated with Commissioner of Indian Affairs John Collier, who wanted to reverse earlier assimilation policies. The law’s key features for governance were:
- tribes could vote on whether to accept the act, and individual communities could reject it
- tribes that accepted could adopt a constitution and bylaws, subject to approval by the Secretary of the Interior
- tribes could also obtain a corporate charter to conduct business
- a revolving credit fund and some support for land purchases were authorized
Votes on the act took place in 1934 and 1935, and then communities began drafting documents. Some nations nationwide rejected the act; others accepted it and organized over the following years. Oklahoma tribes, including the Plains Apache, were generally covered by a related law, the Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936, rather than the main act.
Different Apache nations, different paths
In New Mexico, the Mescalero and Jicarilla communities organized governments in the 1930s, adopting constitutions and establishing councils and, in time, business bodies. Their lands, economies and social histories differed. The Mescalero reservation had come to include Mescalero, Chiricahua and Lipan families, while the Jicarilla reservation was home to the Jicarilla people alone, and each arrangement shaped who sat on councils and how the nation understood itself.
In Arizona, the San Carlos Apache, White Mountain Apache and other Western Apache communities likewise established constitutions and councils, generally in the 1930s. The Western Apache historically organized through local groups and clans rather than through large centralized bodies, which made the task of creating a single council for a reservation a significant change. At Camp Verde the Yavapai-Apache Nation reflects a still different arrangement, bringing together two peoples with distinct histories in one community.
The Chiricahua descendants who remained in Oklahoma after the prisoner of war period formed what is now the Fort Sill Apache Tribe, and their recognition and governance developed in a different manner from the reservation nations in the Southwest. The Tonto Apache and Lipan Apache descendants also have distinct stories of land, recognition and organization.
What the new governments changed
Councils and constitutions gave nations a recognized body to speak and sign agreements, to manage tribal property and to hire legal counsel. They created a framework for elections and defined who was a member. Over time, tribal governments took on duties such as managing land, approving leases and negotiating with outside agencies. In some communities, a tribal business council also began to oversee enterprises such as timber, grazing or recreation.
Importantly, they offered a way to take part in later programs. When the Indian Self-Determination Act of 1975 allowed tribes to contract for services, the existence of a recognized governing body was a precondition for many nations to participate.
Criticisms and limits
Historians and tribal members have raised several concerns about the reorganization era, and views differ widely.
- Models and templates. Many constitutions were based on sample documents prepared by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, with limited room for local variation.
- Federal approval. Constitutions often required the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, and many tribal decisions remained subject to review.
- Fit with older systems. Elected councils did not always match earlier ways of choosing leaders, such as consensus, family standing and group-based leadership. Some communities saw the new offices as distant from traditional leadership.
- Participation. In some places, voting rules and turnout shaped who had a voice, and not every faction felt represented.
- Division of power. Defining what the council could and could not do affected how conflicts between factions were handled.
These critiques should not obscure the fact that many people also saw the councils as valuable tools. In practice, communities adapted the institutions, combining formal offices with continuing respect for elders and family networks.
Revisions and new governing documents
Over the decades, several nations amended or replaced their original constitutions to change how councils are elected, to clarify powers, or to reduce the role of federal approval. Such changes reflect continuing conversations within each community about how best to govern. Questions such as Apache tribal enrollment rules and how to define citizenship in the nation are matters for each nation to decide, and they are the subject of internal debate in many places.
The long view
The adoption of tribal constitutions was not the beginning of Apache governance, nor was it the end of the struggle for control. It was a stage in a longer process that continued through the termination debates of the 1950s, the civil rights reforms of the 1960s and the 1975 contracting law. Today’s tribal governments combine inherited structures, community expectations and federal law in ways that differ by nation.
For the current constitution, council structure and contact information of any Apache nation, readers should consult that nation’s official website. This site is independent and does not speak for any tribe.