Back in the day, enrolled members of some tribes could sell land to non-members. I think most tribes prevent that now. Land sold to non-members became Fee property that can be owned by non-members or sold to non-members. Depending on the reservation, you will find plenty of non-members that own property within the reservation.
Up in Canada some of the reservations do 99-years leases with developers. They retain ownership, but can actually get something for it.
Interesting - that's how the Israel National Fund managed its land in the pre-state period.
Being part Sami I think it's fascinating to read about the system of reservations in the USA. I'm not sure about minority rule, but I'm clearly in favour of saving the unique cultures and ethnicities from dying out. After many years of persecution in Northeren Europe—including forced assimilation often called "Norwegianization" or "Swedification," and near extinction in Russia—we've finally gotten some recognition as…
Reservations were not created out of generosity, quite the opposite.
I'm sorry if it seemed like I made that assumption. I certainly didn't mean to. There were attempts at similar things in the Nordics, and certainly Russia displaced many local tribes in its hunt to stamp out any ethnical uniqueness through-out Russia, under Communism, for the gain of assimilation. We see similar tendencies today in China, although there seems to be a sort of uneasy acceptance of the minorities there. Well, if you disregard the not-so secret re-education camps... Anyway, a great movie about the difficult adaptation to Scandinavian modernity among Samis, and the prejudice towards them, is the Swedish movie Sami Blood. Highly recommended!
> The ruling voided McGirt’s sentence of 1,000 years in prison but he could face a new trial in federal court rather than state court. LOOOOOOOOOOL Man avoids millenium long rape conviction using obscure treaty.
He'll just be re-tried in the correct jurisdiction. I doubt there will be much avoidance.
I had the pleasure of driving through and visiting Oklahoma a decade or so ago. Some people don't like the rural states, but it felt so serene out there. We stopped at a shaved ice place off of some random exit and just sat there on the hood staring out at the plains. There's not much out there but it felt so peaceful. It felt like home.
I had a different feeling. It wasn't empty in the sense that the desert is, which is very pleasant and beautiful, but scarred with industrialized agriculture, and silos stretching out into the infinite surrounding. The fact that there was absolutely nothing at all as far as the eye can see, no mountain or woods, just field upon industrial field with no farm house or town in sight, felt extremely isolating and uncomfo…
There's a big difference between Eastern Oklahoma and Western Oklahoma.
GP's description sounds like Eastern Oklahoma which is more similar in landscape and vegetation to places in Arkansas and Missouri like the Ozarks.
Your description sounds like Western Oklahoma. I lived there from age 12 to 20 and yes it's exactly as you describe, getting worse the farther West you go in the state. Dystopian agriculture.
Although Tulsa is east of OKC, I would put the dividing line between the East/West change in landscape around the Tulsa area.
And, so, in keeping with Gorsuch's minimalism. No re-interpretation of existing law, which makes the right happy (or did, until recently, I guess).
Sometimes I wish the SCOTUS would reinterpret things that were obviously wrong... but I'd much rather have the SCOTUS interpret the law as it was intended, and have Congress fix the actual problems with the law.
"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…
While congress is idle and obstructionist in a way of refusing to allow votes as opposed to "most bills get a failing vote even after ammendments" I wonder how much of the dysfunction is a matter of failing to scale governance.
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!
From the actual opinion: "Oklahoma replies that its situation is different because the affected population here is large and many of its residents will be surprised to find out they have been living in Indian country this whole time. But we imagine some members of the 1832 Creek Tribe would be just as surprised to find them there." Damn, nice shade, Gorsuch! https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pd…
The entire city of Tulsa is there - literally millions of non-native Americans live in this area. Congress will have no choice but to make a law breaking the promise and repatriating the land out of Native American hands.
> Congress will have no choice but to make a law breaking the promise and repatriating the land out of Native American hands.
Oklahoma seems to have only five US Representatives (and two senators of course). It would be ridiculous if seven Congress members can hold a nation hostage.
I don't understand the full implications of this ruling but I don't see how I can support breaking more promises because of political gamesmanship over five representatives out of four hundred and thirty five.
From what I read in this thread, all crimes will still be prosecuted, but by a federal court of law. I don't see a problem.
Sometimes Supreme Court justices will surprise you. Justice Gorsuch is from the American West, and has proven to be a strong and consistent advocate for Native American rights in the Supreme Court, just as Justice Scalia was for the Fourth Amendment.
This comment just demonstrates your political biases, that's all. I don't know why you would be surprised that Gorsuch or Scalia would be in favor of freedoms for the people.
> Why not everyone assimilate? Recognized Native American tribes are sovereign nations . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_sovereignty_in_the_Unit... You might as well ask why European settlers aren't forced to assimilate into them.
They aren't really sovereign nations though, right? Like if a tribe decided to build a giant meth industrial complex or a nuclear weapon facility on their land, the US federal govt is going to shut that down ASAP.
It's a bit messy. The US defines them as "domestic dependent nations". You're correct that they couldn't do those things - Federal law has been deemed to apply to Native Americans in most scenarios, and treaties (often broken/disregarded) give and take certain rights.
In any event, a tribe trying to build a nuke would likely be in the same scenario Iraq and Iran find themselves in, regardless of law or treaty.