[1] The IRA was the most significant initiative of John Collier, who was President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Commissioner of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) from 1933 to 1945.

His proposals were considered highly controversial, as numerous powerful interests had profited from the sale and management of Native lands.

Congress revised Collier's proposals and preserved oversight of tribes and reservations by the Bureau of Indian Affairs within the Department of Interior.

Felix S. Cohen, an official at the Department of the Interior Solicitor's Office, was another significant architect of the Indian New Deal who helped draft the 1934 act.

Due to the Act and other federal courts and government actions, more than two million acres (8,000 km2) of land were returned to various tribes in the first 20 years after passage.

[7][8] In 1954, the United States Department of the Interior (DOI) began implementing the termination and relocation phases of the Act, which had been added by Congress.

Among other effects, termination resulted in the legal dismantling of 61 tribal nations within the United States and ending their recognized relationships with the federal government.

[citation needed] Since the late 20th century and the rise of Indian activism over sovereignty issues, as well as many tribes' establishment of casino gambling on reservations as a revenue source, the U.S. Supreme Court has been repeatedly asked to address the IRA's constitutionality.

[citation needed] In 1995, South Dakota challenged the authority of the Interior Secretary, under the IRA, to take 91 acres (370,000 m2) of land into trust on behalf of the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe (based on the Lower Brule Indian Reservation) in South Dakota v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 69 F.3d 878, 881-85 (8th Cir.

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals found Section 5 of the IRA to be unconstitutional, ruling that it violated the nondelegation doctrine and that the Secretary of Interior did not have the authority to take the land into trust.

[10] Justices Antonin Scalia, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Clarence Thomas dissented, stating that "[t]he decision today—to grant, vacate, and remand in light of the Government's changed position—is both unprecedented and inexplicable."

They went on, "[W]hat makes today's action inexplicable as well as unprecedented is the fact that the Government's change of legal position does not even purport to be applicable to the present case.

"[11] Seven months after the Supreme Court's decision to grant, vacate, and remand, the DOI removed the land in question from trust.

[18] Judge Kahn dismissed UCE's complaint, including the failed theory that the IRA is unconstitutional, on the basis of longstanding and settled law on this issue.

[20] Section 18 of the IRA required that members of the affected Indian nation or tribe vote on whether to accept it within one year of the effective date of the act (25 U.S.C.

There was confusion about who should be allowed to vote on creating new governments, as many non-Indians lived on reservations and many Indians owned no land there, and also over the effect of abstentions.

[24] Historian Brian Dippie notes that the Indian Rights Association denounced Collier as a "dictator" and accused him of a "near reign of terror" on the Navajo reservation.

Philp argues these failures gave ammunition to the return to the previous policy of termination that took place after Collier resigned in 1945.

[29] Hauptman argues that his emphasis on Northern Pueblo arts and crafts and the uniformity of his approach to all tribes are partly explained by his belief that his tenure as Commissioner would be short, meaning that packaging large, lengthy legislative reforms seemed politically necessary.

[32][33][34] The Reorganization Act was wide-ranging legislation authorizing tribal self-rule under federal supervision, ending land allotment, and generally promoting measures to enhance tribes and encourage education.