Argued April 16, 2013.Decided June 25, 2013.

Justices Matthew L. M. FLETCHER and Kathryn E. FORT delivered the opinion of the Court.*

This case is about a little girl (Baby Girl) who is a citizen of the Cherokee Nation, like her father, grandparents, and a multitude of generations before her. American Indian tribal citizenship with a federally recognized tribe is a unique concept in American law. See, e.g., Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 55 (1978) (“[Indian tribes] have power to make their own substantive law in internal matters… .”). Tribal citizens are beneficiaries of the federal government’s trust relationship with Indian tribes, and the federal government has promised to tribal citizens for centuries to assist in the maintenance of tribal governments, cultures, and sovereignty.

In Chapter 8, Brenda Gunn looks to Canada as an example when she provides an analysis of how states have obligations to ensure the protection and promotion of Indigenous peoples’ rights in international investment agreements. Professor Gunn’s chapter begins by discussing some of the rights of Indigenous peoples that are potentially threatened by investment agreements, with a focus on land rights and the right to participate in decision-making on the basis of free, prior and informed consent. She concludes with a discussion of what measures need to be taken in investment agreements to ensure that Indigenous peoples’ rights are properly protected during the negotiation and implementation of investment agreements. This includes reference to the obligations of states and business enterprises to ensure that investment agreements protect Indigenous peoples’ rights while at the same time promoting foreign direct investment.