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

691–700 of 1001 posts

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

#691

Post by genericone »

beenBoutIT wrote: post #556
rudolph9 wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think use of regulated drugs is legal during a religious service https://www.pewforum.org/2006/02/21/supreme-court-rules-that... And, again I think, reservations are exempt from state laws/taxes and to certain extent able to make/enforce their own laws/taxes but they still need to follow federal laws.

The only way to stop our neverending war on drugs is a Constitutional amendment that guarantees every American the right to consume anything they want for any reason. In the next several decades there will be un unprecedented number of elderly Americans living below the poverty line with no pension and medical issues they can't afford to fix - euthanasia will become something of a nuclear option that they'll want ava…

Within reason right? I'm hoping that 'the right to consume anything they want for any reason' wouldn't include those things that cause sudden violent behavior and inability to feel fear and pain.

I forget which particular drug does this, but a search brought me to meth and I found this article which says people feel 'invincible' and 'paranoid' and can't be stopped with non-lethal means.

https://www.cpr.org/2020/02/05/suspects-on-meth-are-hard-to-...

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

#692

Post by efreak »

blackrock wrote: post #536

Incredible. Do the right thing America! Let the Native Americans go. Let them be free. Give them back their lands. You have enslaved them for far too long. You genocided them. Killed their culture. Killed their language. Raped their women. Killed their men. Killed their children. And now, the Covid virus is about to kill off the remaining Navajo Tribe. You must be a heartless monster, if you don’t feel any sense of s…

Let's get rid of the Normans while we're at it, and return England to the Anglo-Saxons. Except they took it from the Romans, who took it from the Britons and Picts. The details might be off, but my point stands: land ownership is complicated; wars happened, and all the genocides and land disputes going unrecognized for political reasons are only recently considered issues that need restitution. I'm sure the Native Americans have their own history of wars (admittedly, likely on a smaller scale) that pushed tribes to live in different places (I wouldn't know, I'm a product of the California school system, and while we learned about the natives in the missions, we spent more time glorifying the missions with models than studying precolonial American history)

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

#693

Post by modmans2nd »

koheripbal wrote: post #457
zetazzed wrote: post #301

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.

Or they won’t?

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

#694

Post by modmans2nd »

falcrist wrote: post #513
JohnL4 wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

“As intended “ isn’t “as it is written “. See the recent ruling that came down saying that LGBTQ people are protected under the civil rights act of 1967 because the words are very plainly written. Just because the people in congress probably didn’t intend to protect the LGBTQ community given the culture at the time the WORDS of the law are very clear.

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

#695

Post by arkis22 »

seehafer wrote: post #295
war1025 wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Federal…

It was a good fear. He missed the possibility that congress could choose to not pass laws or enter a revolving industry door where they consult on laws they did.

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

#696

Post by williesleg »

cheerlessbog wrote: post #668
Gene_Parmesan wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Congress writes the laws. Courts interpret them. Congress can't simply say "oh actually back then we meant this other thing," as that would be completely nullifying the power of the Courts. Yes, they can make an amendment that changes/clarifies the meaning of an existing law, and that might sound like the same thing, but doing that requires the formality of the process -- in particular, bringing it to a vote.

Aren't retroactive laws a thing?

Sure they are, so is ignoring the law. Just look at Hillary and Obama.

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

#697

Post by modmans2nd »

protomyth wrote: post #412
zetazzed wrote: post #301

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…

Gorsuch is a joy to read because he mixes in history with some interesting side comments.

Originalism is degenerate legal philosophy. Textualism is all that is valid. We will look back at some of those ridiculous uncited rulings that speak about “how the writers felt given the time” as foolishness.

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

#698

Post by Darkphibre »

genericone wrote: post #691
beenBoutIT wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only way to stop our neverending war on drugs is a Constitutional amendment that guarantees every American the right to consume anything they want for any reason. In the next several decades there will be un unprecedented number of elderly Americans living below the poverty line with no pension and medical issues they can't afford to fix - euthanasia will become something of a nuclear option that they'll want ava…

Within reason right? I'm hoping that 'the right to consume anything they want for any reason' wouldn't include those things that cause sudden violent behavior and inability to feel fear and pain. I forget which particular drug does this, but a search brought me to meth and I found this article which says people feel 'invincible' and 'paranoid' and can't be stopped with non-lethal means. https://www.cpr.org/2020/02/05…

Pretty sure you are thinking of PCP, which was advertised as causing these behaviors in the 70s and 80s: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phencyclidine

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

#700

Post by supernova87a »

kelnos wrote: post #601
supernova87a wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That one is a puzzler, and I encountered it with a neighborhood issue recently. Why are there some rights that are required to be periodically exercised in order not to be withdrawn? Didn't make sense to me.

Perhaps because they're not "rights"; they're legally-granted privileges. I agree that this sort of law is bonkers, but understand that no one has a "right" to own land[0]. That's a privilege conferred by legal frameworks, and only works because we all more or less agree to abide by them and live in civil society. [0] The US Constitution does not grant this right, and in fact the Framers were well aware of the divide…

The source of the possession being law is understandable.

I guess what is bonkers or could use some (historical?) explanation is why real property is given an allowance to be taken through use by others, when the ownership of the land is recorded (though probably unmarked physically). To some, extending that logic might say, I have a right to take this bike because it's just sitting in front of a house unused.

Is it to help turnover unused land through the generations and ensure it doesn't sit idle without active use by a rich person? What's the purpose of such an allowance in the law?

I'm guessing it comes from some old British reason.

Post reply on HN