Objectives What explains (1) the adoption of these inclusive educational policies, and (2) the timing of the passage of these educational policies? The objective of this study is to examine two competing hypotheses: the first has to do with descriptive representation; the second has to do with Native American nations acting as interest groups. Methods We use a newly constructed data set to estimate logistic regression, difference in difference, and Cox proportional hazards survival models. Results We find evidence that both descriptive representation and campaign contributions can explain whether there is adoption, but that only the latter can account for when there is adoption. Conclusions These findings demonstrate that Native American nations are becoming increasingly mobilized within U.S. state politics, and are finding ways to influence state policies—a pattern that is not just about policies that pertain to indigenous governance and sovereignty, but about policies with broader implications for non‐Native Americans.