Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 1001 posts

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#291

Post by joecool1029 »

ISL wrote: post #49

I found the conclusion compelling. I haven't yet had enough time this morning to read the dissent thoughtfully. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf "The federal government promised the Creek a reservation in perpetuity. Over time, Congress has diminished that reservation. It has sometimes restricted and other times expanded the Tribe’s authority. But Congress has never withdrawn the promised…

> "Unlawful acts, performed long enough and with sufficient vigor, are never enough to amend the law."

Yeah, ok then. I guess that means we can start dunking Karens in rivers again: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desuetude#United_States_law

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#292

Post by microtherion »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #252
iheartblocks wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you expand on this?

I believe the claim is that the Roman emperors came about because the Roman senate became so mired in infighting that it was incapable of governing. I'm not a historian, but from what I understand, there is at least an element of truth in the claim.

For a detailed version of this argument, I recommend Edward J. Watts' Mortal Republic: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/39088591-mortal-republic

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#293

Post by votepaunchy »

busterarm wrote: post #265
ISL wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While in effect it is abdicating, in reality, Congress is spinlocked by indecision. There are deep divides between the branches of the electorate that have brought the representatives to office, as the United States faces a number of divisive issues. Those divides, and a preference for combat over compromise, leave us deadlocked. The center is there for the first party that chooses to leave its entrenchement. When Co…

Except this is demonstrably untrue. The 115th (2017-2018)[1] Congress had both a Republican House and Senate and it got extremely little done. Our Congress is completely ineffective. [1]:Fixed.

Without eliminating the filibuster the Senate can only pass bills with a simple majority by the extremely limited reconciliation process.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#294

Post by Mangalor »

dudul wrote: post #253
Mangalor wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean if we're getting into it, "white man" basically genocided their whole population with disease. The Native Americans never did anything nearly so heinous.

I'm not sure I understand your comment. If the genocide happened due to diseases imported from the Old World, how is it "heinous"? It happened at a time where people had no clue what diseases and immune systems were.

Whether or not they knew they were transporting disease at the time really doesn't excuse the end result: mass genocide. And of course this doesn't authorize taking land.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#295

Post by seehafer »

war1025 wrote: post #156
calvinmorrison wrote: post #128

"We reject that thinking. If Congress wishes to withdraw its promises, it must say so." As with so many controversial court rulings like the ACA mandate case, our courts keep getting put into the decision because of the massive failure that congress is. Congress should either fulfill the promise or not, or whatever. instead the judicial bodies end up making legal judgements with big ramifcations that largely should b…

> because of the massive failure that congress is This is a conclusion I'm coming to more and more. It's easy to blame Presidential overreach or Supreme Court overreach, but the Congress seems to be steadily abdicating responsibility while still managing to get very little of substance accomplished. They are supposed to be the most powerful branch of government, but instead they have deadlocked themselves into useles…

Madison thought it highly unlikely that people who held immense power would not choose to use it. The Framers' model (and fear) was Rome, and much of our Constitutional design is intended to prevent an American Caesar. (One of the reasons Washington was universally revered was because he acted so contrary to what everyone thought was human nature.)

"Ambition must be made to counteract ambition" he tells us in Federalist 10. The idea of a legislator who would derive self-worth not from actually doing things (good or bad) but rather by approbation from their faction solely for making the other side mad was not something they thought possible.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#296

Post by giantg2 »

nabla9 wrote: post #282
giantg2 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so you know, we are a republic. Not quite as easy as a democracy, especially since we are more of an oligarchy (the ruling class is not subject to the complete rule of law).

> Just so you know, we are a republic. Not quite as easy as a democracy, That's very peculiar specially American internet thing to say. In 1787 the terminology was still unsettled but it's not so today. In both political science and in the common use outside the United States democracy and republic are not excluding each other. United States is democracy (the source of power) and republic (the structure of the democr…

It's a democratic republic. This means that the individuals holding the positions of authority in the republic have more concentrated power than the citizens in the democracy. For example, SCOTUS has the power to turn down appeals, even when the circuit decisions are split. Logically, this means that they are denying the rights of one of those two (or more) plaintiffs.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#297

Post by cma »

alextheparrot wrote: post #40
fermienrico wrote: post #16

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?

The US government signed treaties (Legal documents) with Native American tribes. This decision rests on the fact those are, indeed, binding documents. Congress can explicitly modify these treaties, but that is an explicit legislative duty. It really isn't that hard of a question to answer. If I legally own land, how far back in history should it go? Well, probably as far back as the entity that enforces legality says…

The court has never ruled the president can't unilaterally tear up treaties too though, so it may not require Congress. When Bush unilaterally ended the ballistic missile treaty the court refused to hear the case.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#298

Post by mamon »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #175
tyre wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States has a different system of government from Canada so it's not surprising that there are differences. Given the primacy of our Constitution and the Supreme Court's role in interpreting whether a law is consistent with our our Constitution, choosing justices is a rather existential question.

What differences? The Supreme Court of Canada is in essence directly appointed by the Prime Minister so is very vulnerable to politicization. The Supreme Court is also responsible for interpreting whether a law is consistent with our Constitution so it's just as existential.

> The Supreme Court of Canada is in essence directly appointed by the Prime Minister

And that's the crucial difference: if a Supreme Court judge in Canada starts misbehaving I guess Prime Minister can dismiss them just as easily. In the US judges are appointed for life, so if the wrong person gets appointed that choice will haunt us for a few decades.

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#299

Post by ggggtez »

cgb223 wrote: post #104

> The ruling means that for the first time much of eastern Oklahoma is legally considered reservation land. More than 1.8 million people live in the land at issue, including roughly 400,000 in Tulsa, Oklahoma’s second-largest city. So does this effectively create two different rules of law over the same land...? Like how does this work?

It probably will come down to further court cases, but likely, yeah half of Oklahoma will be subject to Oklahoma state law, and half will be subject to tribal law. That's no different than a state being neighbor to a different state with looser/different laws.

Probably they'll work out a compromise like: tribal government pays Oklahoma fees to have them run infrastructure as they have been, and the State forwards tax money to the tribal governments. That seems like the most logical short term solution, essentially status quo.

But the main change will be that tribal lands may now have more power to change local laws (such as ignoring laws against selling alcohol on sundays, etc).

Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation

#300

Post by Vysero »

war1025 wrote: post #156
calvinmorrison wrote: post #128

"We reject that thinking. If Congress wishes to withdraw its promises, it must say so." As with so many controversial court rulings like the ACA mandate case, our courts keep getting put into the decision because of the massive failure that congress is. Congress should either fulfill the promise or not, or whatever. instead the judicial bodies end up making legal judgements with big ramifcations that largely should b…

> because of the massive failure that congress is This is a conclusion I'm coming to more and more. It's easy to blame Presidential overreach or Supreme Court overreach, but the Congress seems to be steadily abdicating responsibility while still managing to get very little of substance accomplished. They are supposed to be the most powerful branch of government, but instead they have deadlocked themselves into useles…

It's a feature not a bug. The entire system was designed s/t it is incredibly hard for anyone in Washington to do anything. There are good reasons for that.
Post reply on HN