Montana has moved to end a five-year legal fight over whether the state actually delivers on the only constitutional guarantee of American Indian education in the country. The final piece, a settlement between the Office of Public Instruction and the plaintiffs in DuPuis-Pablo v. Montana OPI, received preliminary approval from a district court judge on August 25, 2026. A hearing on final approval is set for December 2026, according to Montana Public Radio.
The class action was filed in 2021 by 18 Montana students and their guardians, together with the Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Reservation, the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes, the Fort Belknap Indian Community, the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians of Montana, and the Northern Cheyenne Tribe, court records filed by the American Civil Liberties Union show. The plaintiffs alleged the state failed to implement and enforce its constitutional mandate, which declares that Montana recognizes the distinct and unique cultural heritage of American Indians and is committed in its educational goals to preserving their cultural integrity. The 1999 Indian Education for All Act turned that language into a program, and since 2007 the Legislature has appropriated about $3.5 million a year to school districts for it, the Associated Press reported.
The case resolved in two parts. The Board of Public Education voted unanimously on March 11, 2025 to approve its own negotiated settlement, which committed the board to include meaningful Indian Education for All measures in accreditation determinations, integrate the subject across content standards, require new teachers to complete an introductory course, and meet annually with the Montana Advisory Council for Indian Education, according to a settlement document published by the Native American Rights Fund.
The OPI settlement goes further into the machinery of school oversight. Superintendent Susie Hedalen said in a statement that she was pleased the parties reached an agreement and that she would keep working to ensure every Montana student receives authentic instruction on the state's tribal nations, as reported by Montana Public Radio.
What the settlement requires
The agreement makes Indian Education for All implementation a condition of K-12 accreditation through the state's ACCREDMT system. Schools must provide assurances and evidence that they have allocated funding for Indian Education for All instruction across their curriculum, consistent with prompts J, K, and M in the 2025 version of the system, the settlement agreement filed by the ACLU states.
The settlement adds a prompt to Rubric J requiring evidence of annual consultation with Montana tribes. Acceptable proof includes meeting agendas, sign-in sheets, minutes, written correspondence, memoranda of understanding with tribes, and documentation that tribal input was incorporated into school plans. Schools scoring in the two lowest numerical weights on the rubric will get targeted follow-up, including technical assistance, professional development, and possible referral for administrative review.
Enforcement extends to spending. For ten years, OPI will conduct a thorough review of Indian Education for All expenditures at a minimum of seven schools per year, selected randomly from schools that score in the two lowest weights on rubrics J or K or that have received complaints through the complaint portal. The state will reduce funding for schools that fail to meet expenditure metrics under House Bill 338, and it will publish an annual list of noncompliant schools online, according to the settlement.
Tribal nations also gain a standing role in shaping what gets taught. The settlement requires OPI to place at least three tribal member representatives on every Negotiated Rulemaking Committee that develops content standards, provided three qualified individuals apply, and to make 25 percent of any committee with more than fifteen voting members tribal members. OPI must also extend a written invitation each year to every tribe in Montana to meet in Helena to discuss monitoring, professional development, resources, and complaint responses.
Should disputes arise, the settlement creates a structured path to court. Plaintiffs must give written notice of alleged noncompliance, the parties must meet and confer within 30 days, and either side may ask a court to enforce the terms if the matter remains unresolved.
A court's finding underpins the deal
The legal foundation for the accreditation-based approach was set in April 2023, when the Montana Eighth Judicial District Court denied the defendants' motion to dismiss. The court found that the Indian Education for All mandate imposes duties on every educational agency and all educational personnel, and that OPI and the Board of Public Education have specific statutory authority over accreditation standards, funding distribution, and content standards. The court said the defendants' claim that they had no responsibility or authority to enforce the mandate was completely unfounded, citing the superintendent's general supervision duties and the board's accreditation authority, according to the order as published by the ACLU.
That ruling mattered because the plaintiffs' case rested on a gap between promise and practice. The Native American Rights Fund documented that despite more than a decade of dedicated annual funding, implementation of Indian Education for All remained inconsistent and deficient statewide. Some schools taught the material, but most did not; a few worked with tribes, but most did not; and the state agencies responsible for the program did not enforce compliance, according to NARF's case summary.
How other states approach Indigenous education
Montana is alone in writing the guarantee into its constitution, but other states have built similar expectations through statute. Washington requires school districts to incorporate the Since Time Immemorial curriculum into social studies and to teach about the history, culture, and government of nearby federally recognized tribes, with mandatory tribal consultation before adding regionally specific materials. A 2024 amendment directed Washington's State Board of Education to run an annual monitoring and evaluation system for district compliance starting in the 2024-25 school year, with annual reports to the legislature through 2028, and authorized grants directly to tribes for collaboration-related costs, according to the amended bill text.
Wisconsin's Act 31, passed in 1989, requires instruction on the history, culture, and tribal sovereignty of the state's federally recognized tribes and bands. Wisconsin law encourages districts with Native American students to establish language and culture programs, and it requires a parent advisory committee that includes representatives of existing Tribal Education Departments. Wisconsin was the first state to statutorily mention Tribal Education Departments, in 1995, according to the Native American Rights Fund.
Oregon's 2017 Tribal History/Shared History law directed the state to develop K-12 curriculum, teacher training, and place-based materials in collaboration with each of Oregon's nine federally recognized tribes. Oregon's requirement rests on statute rather than constitutional language, as does North Dakota's 2021 law prioritizing Native American history instruction through standards built on the state's Native American Essential Understandings, according to Brilliant Maps.
What separates the Montana settlement from those models is the enforcement layer: accreditation conditions, spending audits, funding reductions, and formal tribal seats on rulemaking committees. Whether that apparatus closes the implementation gap documented by the plaintiffs will now be tested through a decade of state review and court oversight.