at 69. Denying the Freedmen the right to vote in tribal elections violates the Thirteenth Amendment and the 1866 Treaty, so the Cherokee Nation cannot claim tribal sovereign immunity against a suit complaining of such a badge and incident of slavery. The district court is mistaken to treat every imposition upon tribal sovereignty as an abrogation of tribal sovereign immunity. Sovereignty and immunity are related, Alden v. Maine, 527 U.S. 706, 715, 119 S.Ct. 2240, 144 L.Ed.2d 636 (1999), the latter being an attribute of the former, P.R. Aqueduct & Sewer Auth., 506 U.S. at 146, 113 S.Ct. 684. But it is possible to cut back sovereignty in a way that leaves sovereign immunity intact. Cf. Kiowa Tribe, 523 U.S. at 755, 118 S.Ct. 1700 (“To say substantive state l 343, 357 (2d Cir.2000) (<HOLDING>). We find no express and unequivocal abrogation
holding that congress could not abrogate state sovereign immunity pursuant to the patent clause of article i holding that congress had no power under article i to abrogate state sovereign immunity holding the copyright act not to abrogate tribal sovereign immunity where nothing on the statutes face could be so construed holding the icra not to abrogate tribal sovereign immunity because nothing on the face of title i of the icra purports to subject tribes to the jurisdiction of the federal courts in civil actions for injunctive or declaratory relief holding the americans with disabilities act not to abrogate tribal sovereign immunity and declaring congress abrogates tribal immunity only where the definitive language of the statute itself states an intent either to abolish indian tribes common law immunity or to subject tribes to suit under the act