Anyone interested in historical Indian law cases that didn't set good precedent might be interested in reading In the Courts of the Conqueror: The 10 Worst Indian Law Cases Ever Decided, by Walter Echo-Hawk.
U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
891–900 of 1001 posts
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#892We have to recognize how much we screwed over the Native Americans. We took away their prime land on the East coast. We gave them some shitty land in Oklahoma that we didn't think we would ever want. We made them walk there in the "Trail of Tears", and lots of them died along the way. Then we decided to screw them out of the land in Oklahoma after all, but didn't go though the process properly because we didn't think…
I find your use of "we" interesting because you clearly identify as part of the group that committed those acts hundreds of years ago. How long should a child be responsible for the crimes of their fathers? As an example, assume your father killed someone and stole $1000 dollars from them. You never knew about this didn't choose for him to do this but now someone is coming after you saying you must pay them $1000. Yo…
You're taking a crime that was done to multiple nations and millions of people and trying to turn it into an analogy in a family's personal history, which isn't right; it's nowhere near in the same scale.
The facts are that the colonists / invaders genocided and displaced the original inhabitants of a continent and moved the survivors into reservations, probably to avoid it going down history as racially motivated genocide entirely.
Sure, you didn't do it, your ancestors probably didn't have anything to with it (or the slave trade for that matter), but that doesn't mean you shouldn't fight for other people's rights. They still suffer under what happened a hundred-and-then-some years ago, they are a people whose country was taken from them, whose culture was (attempted to be) erased, and who today what little they got as a consolation has also been attempted to be taken from them because said consolation actually did have some value.
Your analogy is wrong, oversimplified and trivializing the issue.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#893Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
“The great purpose is automatically to quiet all titles which are openly and consistently asserted, to provide proof of meritorious titles, and correct errors in conveyancing.” https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/1942/what-distinguis...
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#894Earlier 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…
What a coincidence - on 19th September 2020 there will two referenda in New Zealand:
- 2020 New Zealand cannabis referendum [1]
- 2020 New Zealand euthanasia referendum [2]
- [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Zealand_cannabis_refe...
- [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_New_Zealand_euthanasia_re...
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#895Earlier quoted context omitted.
Gorsuch is a joy to read because he mixes in history with some interesting side comments.
I spend a lot of time in the summers reading SCOTUS opinions, and I have to flatly disagree with this. Gorsuch peppers in these comments and they distinctly detract from the legal reasoning in the Opinion. It’s cute, but superfluous and further turns justices into “rockstars” to be cheered, which is bad.
If it makes more people interested in reading legal rulings - and in this case, realize that all of eastern Oklahoma belongs to the tribes - it's a good thing. Awareness is important in rulings like this. This ruling was necessary because a lot of people "forgot" that eastern Oklahoma was given to the tribes.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#896Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I guess I trust the Supreme Court more than I trust Congress It's quite a damning indictment of US-style democracy that people trust a small cabal of unelected lifetime appointees without any meaningful oversight, over a larger pool of democratically elected officials.
From my perspective, I would simply restate it as such: "It's quite a damning indictment of US-style democracy that people distrust a larger pool of democratically elected officials over a small cabal of unelected lifetime appointees without any meaningful oversight" You're framing it like Congress is elected by the people and are thus more worthy of their trust and the fact that doesn't happen is the damning part. B…
> In reality there's a TON of special interests driving who gets in front of the population to even be elected to Congress and then what the agenda is for them after being elected.
There aren't really. In other countries yes, the party can kick you out if they don't like you. In the US the parties don't really exist, there are just people.
There have been tons of primary upsets just this week and none of them are because of "special interests". No elite wants Jamaal Bowman or Lauren Boebert elected, but they'll be on the ballot.
Afterwards the control is mostly because we don't fund elections properly, so everyone except AOC has to spend all day calling donors.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#897Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If your jurisdiction does not have "adverse possession" or "prescriptive easement" laws, you can probably tear that fence down or do whatever else you want with it. My jurisdiction does, of course, which is why I mentioned it. > None of this has anything, either legally or in spirit, with the sentence you cited I disagree, strongly. I acknowledge that the fence line is now legal, in the colloquial sense meaning "in…
Most crimes have a statute of limitations. Why should moving a boundary illegally not have a similar limitation?
That is criminal law, and about persecution. This is civil law. So there is no statute of limitations.
Moreover, he isn't looking for retribution, but restitution. He just wants his land back.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#898Earlier quoted context omitted.
when someone - like you - starts working for it. You are going to start, right?
"You're not allowed to talk about a problem unless you're dedicating your life to solving it"
I did not say that. I do not expect that from anyone. Please do not twist my words.
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#899Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most crimes have a statute of limitations. Why should moving a boundary illegally not have a similar limitation?
That is criminal law, and about persecution. This is civil law. So there is no statute of limitations. Moreover, he isn't looking for retribution, but restitution. He just wants his land back.
> That is criminal law, and about persecution. This is civil law. So there is no statute of limitations.
“prosecution”, but, no, civil law has statutes of limitations, too, in fact crimes without statutes of limitations are more common than civil wrongs without them.
See, e.g., this discussion of California’s civil statutes of limitations: https://statelaws.findlaw.com/california-law/california-civi...
Re: U.S. Supreme Court deems half of Oklahoma a Native American reservation
#900We have to recognize how much we screwed over the Native Americans. We took away their prime land on the East coast. We gave them some shitty land in Oklahoma that we didn't think we would ever want. We made them walk there in the "Trail of Tears", and lots of them died along the way. Then we decided to screw them out of the land in Oklahoma after all, but didn't go though the process properly because we didn't think…
> We have to recognize how much we screwed over the Native Americans. We took away their prime land on the East coast. We gave them some shitty land in Oklahoma that we didn't think we would ever want. We made them walk there in the "Trail of Tears", and lots of them died along the way. Then we decided to screw them out of the land in Oklahoma after all, but didn't go though the process properly because we didn't think it mattered.
Tangential: to me (an European) it seems quite insulting to put all the (or just the five "civilized" ones?) native northern american tribes/nations in the same basket by capitalizing "Native Americans".