21–30 of 1001 posts
The decision has no bearing on land ownership or governance, but will force Oklahoma to tie up its historical loose ends. EDIT: I originally incorrectly wrote "All they did was interrupt the trial of an accused rapist." in addition to the above sentence.
And, they didn't interrupt the trial. He's been in prison for more than two decades for this crime.
Can someone explain why America has reservations? From what I know, Native Indians had this land almost 2+ centuries ago. Why have a special, looks like an autonomous, region and special treatment to people that are a few generations down from when this happened? How far back into the history should we go?
In this case the US was engaged in very specific legal deals with these groups. Reservations grew out of that process.
This is a terrible article, it just cites the facts of the decision, teases the implication (OMG half of OK!) and explains nothing. Here's a review article about the same case from a while back which does a better job: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/11/28/half-land-... The tl;dr is that, yes, indeed, half of Oklahoma is part of land reserved for the Creek in a 1833 treaty. And almost two centuries of sub…
No income tax? Never mind injuns coming. Where do people sign up to become one? Huge percentage of population has some Indian blood. The exact definition can be worth a lot to many people. Let the drama begin!
This is a terrible article, it just cites the facts of the decision, teases the implication (OMG half of OK!) and explains nothing. Here's a review article about the same case from a while back which does a better job: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/11/28/half-land-... The tl;dr is that, yes, indeed, half of Oklahoma is part of land reserved for the Creek in a 1833 treaty. And almost two centuries of sub…
No income tax? Never mind injuns coming. Where do people sign up to become one? Huge percentage of population has some Indian blood. The exact definition can be worth a lot to many people. Let the drama begin!
Every tribe can determine their own criteria, and while some do consider how much "Indian blood" you have, that seems to be mostly because the US government heavily promoted the idea 100 years ago: https://chicago.suntimes.com/2018/10/20/18426433/warren-ance...
This is a terrible article, it just cites the facts of the decision, teases the implication (OMG half of OK!) and explains nothing. Here's a review article about the same case from a while back which does a better job: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/11/28/half-land-... The tl;dr is that, yes, indeed, half of Oklahoma is part of land reserved for the Creek in a 1833 treaty. And almost two centuries of sub…
No income tax? Never mind injuns coming. Where do people sign up to become one? Huge percentage of population has some Indian blood. The exact definition can be worth a lot to many people. Let the drama begin!
Can someone explain why America has reservations? From what I know, Native Indians had this land almost 2+ centuries ago. Why have a special, looks like an autonomous, region and special treatment to people that are a few generations down from when this happened? How far back into the history should we go?
> Can someone explain why America has reservations? Because we signed treaties with the tribes, which are now semi-sovereign entities as a result.
Can someone explain why America has reservations? From what I know, Native Indians had this land almost 2+ centuries ago. Why have a special, looks like an autonomous, region and special treatment to people that are a few generations down from when this happened? How far back into the history should we go?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very interesting. Is this the first time a major city has fallen within a reservation?
And, either way, what are the implications to non-tribe citizens and non-tribe governments?