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

331–340 of 1001 posts

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

#331

Post by rndmize »

calvinmorrison wrote: post #216
rndmize wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm tempted to say that the uselessness of Congress is in indication of something else - we've pushed too much to the federal level. The decades-long tooth-and-nail fighting over healthcare makes me think that an effective system just can't be done federally; there's too much disagreement between states. Why not scrap most of the social programs, cut federal taxes, and let states implement their own?

Balkanization is the fastest way to find out what works and doesn't and allow for local control and decision making, it also makes nice for frequent wars and nutty leaders.

Nuttier leaders than what we currently have, you mean? As far as I can tell, the US did pretty well with less federal power for several hundred years; I don't really see how rolling back 50 years of federal policy would lead to balkanization.

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

#332

Post by jorblumesea »

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…

Congress merely reflects the candidates that we elect and the underlying political sentiments of their constituents. Since they serve shorter terms than judges and are more localized than the President, it's hardly surprising that they are more impacted by the political divide.

If Americans cannot agree on anything, therefore, congress cannot either. People blame congress, but it's the American people who are ultimately responsible.

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

#333

Post by [deleted] »

NonEUCitizen wrote: post #223
starpilot wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd rather not. In the NorCal (Jefferson) reservations, the natives setup huge nets to catch fish, load them into refrigerated trucks, and sell the catch to San Francisco restaurants. It's devastating to the ecosystem. As with building casinos, or the Grand Canyon Skywalk, they tend to commercialize/exploit as much as they can when they are free from state laws.

They are sovereign. Neither you nor the state of California should impose your views on them. If anything, we should ask permission from them to be on California land.

[deleted]

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

#334

Post by timsally »

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?

Currently the federal government has a wide range of powers over reservation land such as the ability to prosecute crime. For better or for worse, Congress can expand these powers at any time to include dissolving the reservation. The law in all these aforementioned areas is well settled.

The issue in this case was with a state government, specifically Oklahoma. This ruling will limit Oklahoma's ability to prosecute crime when (1) it occurs on the reservation and (2) involves members of the tribe. Congress would have to act to change this, or some agreement could be reached with the tribe.

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

#335

Post by throwaway0a5e »

eropple wrote: post #269
rndmize wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm tempted to say that the uselessness of Congress is in indication of something else - we've pushed too much to the federal level. The decades-long tooth-and-nail fighting over healthcare makes me think that an effective system just can't be done federally; there's too much disagreement between states. Why not scrap most of the social programs, cut federal taxes, and let states implement their own?

> Why not scrap most of the social programs, cut federal taxes, and let states implement their own? Because I'm not really interested in abandoning my fellow citizens who lack the means or the support structures to leave where they currently are to the tender mercies of people who plainly don't give a damn about them. Even every "red state" has plenty of people in need who can't afford to go elsewhere and shouldn't b…

>Because I'm not really interested in abandoning my fellow citizens who lack the means or the support structures to leave where they currently are to the tender mercies of people who plainly don't give a damn about them.

>Even every "red state" has plenty of people in need who can't afford to go elsewhere and shouldn't be asked to abandon their families and their lives to just not die.

>(EDIT: I normally don't respond to killed comments, because feeding the trolls sucks, but: I live in Massachusetts, dude. I'm used to a state that actually works. I wish you all had them too.)

You could write an analogous comment from a perspective of "people in the blue states need saving too".

Are you going to be singing that same pro-federal tune if issues don't go your way at the federal level?

I live in Massachusetts too. While the burning dollars of taxpayers does keep us warm there is no shortage of states in the nation that would revolt if it had government that "works" the way our government "works". People in other states are not so willfully subservient to government in the name of the common good as we are. We step in line for things that would provoke revolt in states with stronger traditions of individualism and distrust for government.

We have a limited federal government for a reason. Massholes like us have no business telling people thousands of miles away with different cultural values and different economic circumstances how to live their lives. The hell do you or I know about what's best Wyoming? Exactly.

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

#336

Post by rkuykendall-com »

ponker wrote: post #319
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…

What Gorsuch's opinion does directly imply is that the "promise" to the Creek can be revoked by Congress at any time, i.e. it's hardly a "promise" at all.

Literally nothing in the legal system is permanent for perpetuity. Even the constitution can be amended in any way. All laws, treaties, etc. can be undone with enough effort.

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

#337

Post by vorpalhex »

Mangalor wrote: post #268
luckylion wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's called a life sentence. Nobody is expected to live a thousand years, and they're not going to keep them in prison after they die.

I think you miss the point.

Let us say that the punishment for murder in the first degree is always a 50 year jail term. A man who is 75 years of age is charged with two murders and convicted.

1. At 75 years of age, he will not live to be 175

2. The law dictates that the punishment per murder must be 50 years

3. He's been convicted of two murders, and must have both charges applied to him unless we are not to expect punishment for one of the victims.

Ergo, he must have a term much longer than his lifespan.

There are a thousand details I just skipped over (concurrent sentances, multiple crimes commited in the same act, stacking versus non-stacking offenses, etc) but this isn't unusual and is a perfectly rational and sane outcome.

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

#338

Post by dkarl »

I realize this is a petty concern compared to the repeated and compounded violations of the rights of Native Americans, but I can't help wondering if the unsettled questions related to this ruling will make it impractical for Tesla to choose Tulsa as a factory site.

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

#340

Post by krapp »

Sharlin wrote: post #250
krapp wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They are supposed to be the most powerful branch of government, but instead they have deadlocked themselves into uselessness. That's what many Americans wanted, and voted for. A government that governs least governs best, after all.

I… find it rather difficult to believe that a sufficient number of Americans coordinated and voted strategically over decades in order to intentionally bring to existence the current two-party deadlock situation.

What is a political party if not a means of mass coordination and strategic voting?

American politics has become less about policy and more about ideology and party loyalty over time, and that ideology has become more entrenched and unwilling to compromise with opponents.

Post reply on HN