PART 2: THE AFTERMATH
May 3, 2026
Legal disputes over tribal law enforcement authority continue after the 2015 Solicitor M-Opinion
By Vivian LaMoore, Inaajimowin Editor
The release of the Department of the Interior's M-Opinion in November 2015 and the Department of Justice decision accepting concurrent federal criminal jurisdiction on the Mille Lacs Reservation in January 2016 did not end the dispute between the Mille Lacs Band and Mille Lacs County. Instead, tensions between the two governments soon escalated.
Minnesota Statute 626.90 authorized Mille Lacs police officers to enforce Minnesota criminal law within the 1855 Reservation boundaries, with certain limitations. Section 626.90 required the Band to enter into a cooperative agreement with the County Sheriff. The Band and the County Sheriff had operated under a series of such agreements since Section 626.90 was enacted in 1991.
On June 21, 2016, the Mille Lacs County Board passed a resolution revoking the cooperative law enforcement agreement between the Band and the County Sheriff. Then-County Attorney Joe Walsh said the agreement was being revoked because "the cooperative agreement was no longer cooperative." However, the County Board's resolution made clear it was revoking the agreement to protest the M-Opinion and TLOA decision.
County officials claimed the Band had deliberately withheld the M-Opinion from the County for several months to seek an amendment to Section 626.90. Band officials disputed that claim, noting that Mille Lacs Band Chief Executive Melanie Benjamin publicly announced the decision during the annual State of the Band Address on January 12, 2016. By late January, the M-Opinion was also publicly available on the Interior Department's website and had been referenced on Band social media. This was well before the beginning of the legislative session on March 8, 2016.
County officials also expressed concern over their interpretation of the TLOA, arguing that the Band could refer cases directly to the U.S. Attorney's Office without consulting the Mille Lacs County Attorney's Office.
The county further objected to the Great Nations Gang and Drug Task Force, an intertribal law enforcement partnership formed in 2015 between the Mille Lacs, Leech Lake, Lower Sioux, and Upper Sioux Indian communities. County officials stated they did not recognize the validity of the task force.
According to the County Attorney's Office, the revocation of the cooperative agreement meant tribal officers lost their state law enforcement authority and could face arrest or prosecution for impersonating a peace officer if they attempted to exercise that authority.
Band officials said the revocation of the agreement and threats against tribal officers significantly disrupted law enforcement efforts on the Reservation and contributed to increased drug trafficking and violent crime.
In November 2017, the Trump Administration urged the County not to interfere with Tribal law enforcement officers on the Mille Lacs Reservation. Citing the M-Opinion, the Trump Administration wrote that "the County's assertion that the Band's reservation has been diminished or disestablished has no basis in law and conflicts with the federal government's longstanding position."
Later that month, the Mille Lacs Band filed a federal lawsuit against Mille Lacs County, the county attorney, and the sheriff. The lawsuit sought declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent what the Band described as ongoing interference with the Band's law enforcement authority within the Reservation.
During the litigation, the Minnesota Attorney General's Office conducted its own review of the Mille Lacs Reservation boundaries. The state reached the same conclusion as the Department of the Interior's M-Opinion: The Reservation established under the 1855 Treaty had never been disestablished.
In March 2022, the federal district court issued a 93-page decision. After reviewing treaties, federal law, and court precedents, the court concluded that Congress had never disestablished or diminished the Mille Lacs Reservation established under the 1855 Treaty.
After additional proceedings, the court ruled in January 2023 that Mille Lacs County had unlawfully restricted the Band's law enforcement authority within the Reservation when it revoked the cooperative agreement in 2016.
Mille Lacs County appealed those rulings to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
In 2023, while the appeal was pending, the Minnesota Legislature amended Minnesota Statute 626.90. The amendment clarified that the Band does not need a cooperative law enforcement agreement with the County Sheriff to enforce Minnesota laws throughout the 1855 Reservation.
Because the amended statute provided the authority the Band had sought through its lawsuit, the Eighth Circuit concluded the case was moot. The appellate court dismissed the County's appeal and vacated the lower court rulings without deciding the merits of the Reservation boundary issue.
The three-judge panel stated that the question of the Reservation's legal status would have to be addressed in a separate case presenting an active dispute.
From 1855 to the early 1900s, the Band’s ancestors engaged in decades-long struggle and made enormous sacrifices to preserve the Mille Lacs Reservation. Ever since then, the Band has maintained consistently that the Reservation established under the 1855 Treaty was never disestablished or diminished. That position was later affirmed by federal and state authorities, the Department of the Interior's M-Opinion, and the federal district court.
Despite those findings, Mille Lacs County officials have continued to challenge that conclusion.
The County has recently submitted a letter to the Department of the Interior requesting that the department revisit its analysis and reverse the M-Opinion, even though there is no active dispute requiring the Department to revisit the issue.