Facts: - a group of about 70 Tee-Hit-Ton Indians occupied over 350,000 acres of land and 150 square miles of water

Issue: Did the Tee-Hit-Ton Indians, and identifiable group of Alaska Indians, have a constitutional right to recover damages from the sale of timber from land they occupied?

Rule: Groups that occupy lands but do not own them have no compensable interest in them.

Holding: Because this group of Indians was not given the land, but rather were given a right to occupy the land, they have no compensable interest in it.

Rationale: Congress has never recognized any legal interest of the petitioner in the land. Numerous cases have upheld this belief. Congress never had the intention of granting the Indians any permanent rights in the lands of Alaska. They were only given a right to occupy. Although the Indians argue that because the previous controller of the area, Russia, never took their lands, and therefore Alaska is different that the rest of the states, the Court has found no difference between the use of land in the States and Alaska. The Tee-Hit-Ton Indians used the land in a nomadic way just as the Indians of Eastern US.

Policy/Notes: By making this decision, Congress is left with the choice of making any gratuities for the termination of Indian occupancy of Government owned land, rather than making compensation for its value a rigid principle. In no case has this Court ever held that taking of Indian title required compensation. It is up to Congress to pass any laws it may wish to give Indians more rights, not the courts.