221–230 of 1001 posts
So when are they going to get to all the other unlawful stuff the government does?
When cases against all the other unlawful stuff reach them, presumably.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If congress doesn't change something, then that means they have determined no change is necessary. That isn't an invitation for the executive branch (or judiciary) to overreach. In theory congress could go years without passing a single law, and that would be fine. It would signal that the current laws are sufficient. (As an aside, congress has ceded much of it's lawmaking authority to federal agencies anyway -- so e…
I understand your point, but I fear you may misunderstand, because I believe the Decision is in line with your views. The justices' point is that congress, in its inaction, has not enabled the reduction in Creek reservations that has been perpetrated through large-scale disenfranchisement all all levels of governance, actions which are in direct conflict with the reservation treaty signed in perpetuity. For these act…
My disagreement is with people who excuse executive overreach by saying, "congress refused to act." Put another way, they're saying, "I had to work around the law to get what I wanted."
Honestly after all the Native Americans went through, give them the whole state at least. People in the United States speak and reflect often about the atrocities of slavery. We need to equally reflect on and remember the atrocities against Native Americans.
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.
"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…
> our courts keep getting put into the decision because of the massive failure that congress is We need more Civics classes for students. Branches of the Federal Government being put into the decision because of a massive failure of another is exactly why we have 3 branches. It's rock-paper-scissors. Checks and balances. Which is why, for instance, people squawk so much when the executive branch imagines itself new p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These rights existing because the US government signed treaties with independent foreign nations. Those treaties are valid law until the Congress withdraws from them.
Did the US government ever acknowledge them as independent foreign nations? The War of Independence was partly fought to get away from the British proclamation of 1763 that said you couldn't settle west of the Appalachians without a treaty. Oklahoma was part of the Louisiana purchase, the US considered it their land for that reason. The US signed treaties with the indigeneous population in an attempt to secure peace,…
Yes. That's why we had to write treaties with them, to gain proper title to the land. Even if we treated those who signed the treaties as having more authority than they actually did, and if we treated the treaties as mere scraps of paper, those treaties were still seen as treaties with legitimate sovereign nations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why not everyone assimilate? Yes, exactly, why not the USians assimilate into the many Native nations they occupy? They've had literal centuries...
Native Americans had wars and conquered each other for millennia before white man came. It wasn't some unified utopia in the Americas like Pocahontas leads you to believe. It was a huge cycle of tribalism, conquering each other, and bloodshed. So... because they were conquering each other first, a technologically superior entity isn't allowed to conquer them?
"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…
> our courts keep getting put into the decision because of the massive failure that congress is We need more Civics classes for students. Branches of the Federal Government being put into the decision because of a massive failure of another is exactly why we have 3 branches. It's rock-paper-scissors. Checks and balances. Which is why, for instance, people squawk so much when the executive branch imagines itself new p…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean "them"? You do realize that there were many different tribes who had very drastically different interactions with the US, right?
I believe the answer would be > Native Americans. Whether that encompasses multiple tribes or not, doesn't change that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and has extremely deep pockets
Not necessarily the case. There are lit fees of course, and filing fees, discovery, etc. But once you get to the SCOTUS stage, assuming you're not retaining Gibson Dunn or Covington or someone's supreme court practice, there are many clinics with some star power that will do the case for free. Many top law schools have Supreme Court clinic and we sought out cases that we could bring to SCOTUS. We would have died to h…
So when are they going to get to all the other unlawful stuff the government does?
when someone - like you - starts working for it. You are going to start, right?