O'JIIBWAAY NATION RED BEAR BAND

​

the Jĕs´sakkīd´, the Wâbĕnō´, the Jiisiikiwinini

​

                        October 2, 1863        April 12, 1864        March 5, 1872   

 

We are a people of treaty, ancestry, and living responsibility. This site preserves our public record—treaties, federal documentation, governance structure, and cultural resources—so descendants and the public can understand who we are and what commitments were made in writing.  

​

The Red Bear Pembina Chippewa Band "Aniibiminani-ziibiwininiwag", "People of the High-bush Cranberry River" are THE principle Anishinaabe leadership Band whose ancestral homeland liesin roots tracing from the Anishinabeg Reindeer Dynasty from the Red River Valley region of present-day Chippewa of the Hair Hills Turtle Mountains of North Dakota, O'Jiibwaay of the Wild Rice Fields of Minnesota, Thunder Bay Mt. McKay, Wisconsin, the southern Manitoba with principle lineal descendency of the Michilimackinac Odawa of Mackinac Island. Historically associated with the Pembina River and Red River of the North. The Pembina people were recognized as a distinct Ojibwe band and were signatories to the Treaty of Old Crossing of 1863, which remains central to their historical and political identity. As part of the Anishinaabeg and the greater Three Fires peoples, the Pembina Chippewa Band maintain a living connection to their language, culture, and governance traditions, rooted in kinship, land stewardship, and treaty-based rights. Today, the Pembina Chippewa Band continue to assert their history, identity, and continuity as Anishinaabe people through education, advocacy, and the preservation of their cultural and historical record.

​

O'JIIBWAAY NATION LINEAL HISTORIC LEADERSHIP

​

O'JIIBWAAY OGIMAAKWE Succession
9. Wâbĕnō´ Ogimaakwe Nibwâskââ Ogichidââ

called by Gichi-Gichi Ogimaa Ma'Lingaan
8. Gichi-Ogimaakwe Patricia Rose Brunelle 
7. Ogimaakwe Mary Albina Brunelle (Dejarlais)
6. Ogimaakwe Julianne Brunelle (Montreuille)
5. Ogimaakwe Margaret Machequayaince Ah-Dik Songab
4. Ogimaakwe Marie Techomegood Ah-Dik Songab Do-Daun
3. Ogimaakwe Marguerite Utinawasis Ah-Dik Songab Do-Daun
2. Ogimaakwe Claire Équaywid Ah-Dik Songab Do-Daun
1. Ogimaakwe Tisanti Eshipequag Wáȟpe šá (1600 AD)

​​

​

​​

​

​

​​​​

​

The Pembina Chippewa Tribe was not initially formed by the consolidation of distinct, pre-existing bands in the modern sense; rather, it was a historical, geographically defined band of Ojibwe (Chippewa) people who lived along the Red River and its tributaries. This group, known as the Aniibiminani-ziibiwininiwag in Ojibwe, was composed of extended family groups and was heavily intermixed with Cree and French-Canadian/Métis individuals through intermarriage in the fur trade era. Following the 1870's treaty deception the Little Shell Band and the Red Bear Band divided; the Turtle Mountain Band was formed by the U.S. Government to assimilate the Pembina Chippewa Tribe which was at one time ONE BAND descendants while distinct leadership remained across Montana and North Dakota. Members of the Red Bear Band, the leadership band of the Pembina Chippewa, were forced into consolidation with the Turtle Mountain Band primarily through severe U.S. government policies that decimated their land base and traditional way of life, especially the buffalo hunt. As white settlement increased and the U.S.-Canada border ("Medicine Line") was enforced, the vast traditional hunting grounds of the Pembina Chippewa were opened to settlers without the tribe's consent. A key moment was the U.S. government's 1892 McCumber Agreement (often called the "Ten-Cent Treaty"), which drastically reduced the large land claim of the Turtle Mountain Chippewa to a tiny 6x12 mile reservation and offered only ten cents per acre for the remainder, a sum considered woefully inadequate and secured under protest and against the will of principal leaders like Chief Little Shell and Chief Red Bear. Those who were excluded from the official tribal rolls or refused the terms faced starvation and the withholding of rations, leaving them with no viable option but to settle on the diminished Turtle Mountain Reservation or relocate to other small reserves in Montana and North Dakota to survive.

​

The primary leadership of the historical Pembina Chippewa Band included:

​

• Little Shell's Band (Ase-anse): Led by Chief Joseph Thomas Petite Weesh-e-damo Tacgitcit Little Shell II

• Red Bear's Band (Misko-Mukwuh): Led by Principle Chief Pierre Decoteau Misko-Mukwuh Red Bear I​

Treaties & Treaty Rights

The 1863 Old Crossing Treaty and the 1864 supplementary articles are foundational federal agreements involving the Pembina Band. They document land cession, obligations promised in return, and specific provisions tied to Pembina leadership and descendants. Our treaty pages explain these agreements in plain language and link to primary sources.

To specifically protect the rights of the Pembina Chippewa Band as a sovereign entity, courts have relied on a distinct body of case law that differentiates the Band’s original identity from its successor tribes. Sovereignty for the Pembina Band is established through its status as a "juridical person" and an "identifiable group" with inherent rights separate from the U.S. government.

1. Recognition as a Sovereign Identifiable Group

• Red Lake & Pembina Bands v. United States (1965): The U.S. Court of Claims ruled that the Pembina Band exists as a "separate entity" in law for the purpose of tribal claims. This established that even if the Band's members were dispersed among multiple reservations (such as Turtle Mountain, White Earth, or Rocky Boy’s), the Band itself maintains a distinct sovereign legal status.

• Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States (1973): This case reinforced that the Pembina Band held "Indian Title" to territory prior to its official cessions. By recognizing this title, the court affirmed the Band’s historical sovereignty over its lands, which serves as the legal foundation for modern claims of self-governance. 

2. Affirmation of Inherent Powers and Jurisdiction

• Peltier v. Haaland (2021): While often cited for its $59 million settlement, this case is a vital affirmation of the Band's sovereign right to hold the U.S. government accountable for trust mismanagement. The court's approval of the settlement recognized the Band's collective authority to negotiate and receive redress for historical wrongs.

• United States v. Cooley (2021): Although not Pembina-specific, this Supreme Court ruling is frequently invoked by Chippewa bands to protect sovereignty. It unanimously affirmed that tribal officers have the inherent authority to search and detain non-Indians on tribal lands, a core exercise of sovereign police power. 

3. Protection Against Federal Overreach

• Chippewa Indians of Minnesota v. United States (1937): The Supreme Court held that the government's power to manage tribal property is subject to constitutional limits. This protects the Pembina Band from the government dealing with its lands as if they were federal property, affirming that the Band’s property rights are those of a sovereign, not just a ward.

• Lac du Flambeau Band v. Coughlin (2023): This 2023 Supreme Court ruling clarified that while the Bankruptcy Code may abrogate tribal sovereign immunity in specific contexts, it simultaneously reaffirms that tribes are "governmental units". This status legally cements the Pembina and its successor bands as governments rather than mere private associations. 

Federal Record & Documentation

Our federal record includes treaties, congressional documents, and claims-era proceedings that reference Pembina descendants and related obligations. This site organizes these materials for transparency, research, and lawful preservation of the historical record.

​

The rights of the Pembina Chippewa Band and its successor groups—including the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, the Chippewa Cree Tribe, the White Earth Band, and the Little Shell Band—are protected by a combination of Supreme Court rulings, land claim settlements, and historical treaties. 

Key case law and legal foundations include:

1. Significant Court Cases 

• Peltier v. Haaland (2021): A landmark $59 million settlement approved by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. It resolved a decades-long dispute over the federal government’s mismanagement of trust funds belonging to the Pembina Chippewa. The court ruled that these settlement funds must also pass to the heirs of original beneficiaries who have since passed away.

• Minnesota v. Mille Lacs Band of Chippewa Indians (1999): While centered on the Mille Lacs Band, this Supreme Court ruling is the foundational authority for all Chippewa bands. It affirmed that usufructuary rights (the right to hunt, fish, and gather) reserved in treaties remain intact unless Congress clearly and explicitly revokes them.

• Chippewa Indians of Minnesota v. United States (1937): This Supreme Court case addressed the Red Lake and Pembina bands' land titles. The Court held that the government's power to manage Indian property is subject to constitutional limits and that lands of one tribe cannot be given to another without just compensation. 

2. Foundational Treaties and Agreements

These documents form the legal basis for the rights defended in the courts: 

• 1863 Treaty of Old Crossing: Ceded the Red River Valley but recognized the Pembina and Red Lake bands' distinct interests.

• 1892 McCumber Agreement (The "Ten-Cent Treaty"): A controversial agreement involving 10 million acres of land near the North Dakota-Canada border. Ongoing legal battles over the adequacy of compensation from this agreement directly led to the 2021 Peltier settlement. 

3. Protection of Sovereignty

• Tribal Sovereignty (Worcester v. Georgia, 1832): Although not specific to the Pembina, this foundational Supreme Court ruling established that Indian nations are "distinct, independent political communities" where state laws have no force. This remains the core legal shield for the Pembina Band's right to self-governance. 

Tribal Governance

Tribal governance includes traditional leadership roles, council responsibility, and community order rooted in spiritual and cultural law. Our governance pages explain titles, functions, and the continuity of leadership responsibilities carried through generations.

The rights of the Pembina Chippewa Band to determine their own tribal governance are protected by a specific legal framework that recognizes their inherent sovereignty and their unique status as an "identifiable group" separate from the U.S. government.

The following cases and legal principles specifically protect their right to self-governance:

1. Recognition of the "Pembina Band" as a Distinct Political Entity

• Red Lake & Pembina Bands v. United States (1965): The U.S. Court of Claims ruled that the Pembina Band remains a recognized sovereign entity even if its members are dispersed across multiple modern reservations (such as Turtle Mountain, White Earth, or Rocky Boy’s). This is a critical protection for Pembina groups seeking to maintain a governance structure separate from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).

• Jones v. Meehan (1899): This foundational case established that neither the Secretary of the Interior nor the BIA can divest a treaty signatory (like the Pembina Band) of their prior recognized treaty rights, including the right to internal governance. 

2. Modern 2025 Case Law on Governance and Representation

• Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. Howe (2025): Currently before the Supreme Court of the United States, this case centers on the Band’s right to challenge discriminatory voting maps that dilute tribal political power. In July 2025, the Supreme Court granted a stay that protected the Band's ability to maintain fair representation, a key element of their sovereign right to influence governance at both the tribal and state levels.

• Peltier v. Haaland (2021): While primarily a trust mismanagement case, it affirmed the sovereign authority of the successor bands (Turtle Mountain, Chippewa Cree, White Earth, and Little Shell) to represent the collective interests of all Pembina descendants in a unified legal action. 

3. Protection of Internal Membership and Authority

• Inherent Right to Determine Membership: Under the doctrine of Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez (1978), which applies to the Pembina as a sovereign nation, tribes have the absolute right to determine their own membership and forms of government without federal interference. This prevents the U.S. from dictating who is considered a member of the Pembina Band for the purpose of voting or governance.

• Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States (1973): This case recognized that the Pembina Band held original Indian title to their lands, which provides the legal basis for their current tribal constitutions and the authority of their elected councils to govern those lands. 

Culture, Language, & Education

Language is identity. We provide resources and links for learning Ojibwe, cultural teachings, and community education initiatives that strengthen memory, belonging, and responsibility to future generations.

Sacred Records & Publications

Our records preserve teachings, lineage memory, and spiritual witness. These works are presented as cultural archives—written to protect names, remember duties, and keep the people connected to what has been carried forward.