ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2020 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, July 10, 2020

The decision was correct

It's fascinating to see "rule of law" conservatives decrying the Supreme Court decision to honor an 1833 Indian treaty that was never abrogated and is still in force:
The Supreme Court’s recognition of half of Oklahoma as Native land appears to right centuries of historic injustice. It could also make the state a chaotic mess of overlapping jurisdictions where hardened criminals walk free.

In a stunning 5-4 ruling on Thursday, the court found that a massive swath of eastern Oklahoma should be recognized as a Native American reservation. The state’s largest city, Tulsa, sits on this land, along with 1.8 million people, of whom only 15 percent are Native Americans.
It doesn't right any injustices. It doesn't actually even change anything. It simply respects the actual language of the still-extant treaty. The fact that the US government broke its treaties with casual disregard for the legalities doesn't justify the consequences or seal them in stone. Every signed treaty should be honored to the letter.

And the appeal to "hardened criminals" walking free is a complete joke in a country that already has tens of millions of criminal invaders due to its failure to stop immigration.

Labels: ,

102 Comments:

Blogger Jim July 10, 2020 2:09 PM  

Thank you, Supremes. Now do stare decisis.

Blogger VD July 10, 2020 2:12 PM  

You're banned, Askuka74. Don't ever try to make me the subject.

Blogger Phelps July 10, 2020 2:19 PM  

Let's have real sovereignty for the Indian Nations, including the ability to naturalize new members.

Blogger Kingly Gift July 10, 2020 2:24 PM  

I don't think the Federal government has any intention of treating the Indian tribe with proper regard for its National sovereignty or plans to adhere to every letter of past treaties. I think this is just another way for the Central Empire government to undermine State sovereignty. Basically it says "we (US Congress) screwed up in how we dealt with Indians, as a result, this State loosen some of its power." This puts all the States on notice that they can loose legal jurisdiction over much of their land at the arbitrary discretion of 5 black-robed Prometheans.

But I could be wrong, I'm just going off what I've heard about the case, I don't have time to read all the details.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 2:24 PM  

Phelps wrote:Let's have real sovereignty for the Indian Nations, including the ability to naturalize new members.
They don't want you.

Blogger doctrev July 10, 2020 2:27 PM  

If 85% of Oklahomans will just hand over half their state because 3 mouthy Hebrews and their pets said so, they deserve to lose it.

Blogger Brett baker July 10, 2020 2:28 PM  

This is why "Kill them all, God shall know His own" is good advice.

Blogger Balam July 10, 2020 2:28 PM  

The foretold balkanization begins?

Blogger Some Guy July 10, 2020 2:29 PM  

Honestly, Boomers have been asleep at the wheel for well over 3 decades and now they are all screaming about this in my town. It's like music. The drum beat happens to be gnashing teeth, but it's beautiful. No more California, No more Hawaii, No more Wisconsin. I almost can't stand how great it is. We had a neighbor say he wanted to expatriate to Mexico and was in works to do so, but has been denied travel rights because of the Corona Virus. It just gets better and better.

Blogger NewTunesForOldLogos July 10, 2020 2:37 PM  

For better or worse, this is the start of race-specific law enforcement policies.

Blogger Wes350 July 10, 2020 2:37 PM  

No problem with this as it was a still-extant treaty.

Everyone else needs to stop being a bunch of crybabies and sort the jurisdictional issues out like adults.

It's dead simple: do what you have to do to give all Tribal police the same powers as the FEDs (U.S. Marshalls etc.) And give the tribal governments the exact same powers as state governments on tribal land.

If the tribal leaders are smart they'll just fold all the previously existing law enforcement agencies into the federal authority Tribal fold.

In Fact this can be utter gold for the tribes in that they can literally kick out all the criminal non-Indian population off their land. Thus leaving them with a large population of productive whites who have to toe the line if they want to stay, and a great police to native ratio that will allow them to effectively police their own.

Blogger Reprehensible Adam July 10, 2020 2:37 PM  

Now how much money will it take to buy back the land?

Blogger Phelps July 10, 2020 2:48 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:
They don't want you.


I didn't ask to go, and they don't need to speak for them, pinkskin.

Blogger Phelps July 10, 2020 2:53 PM  

Having read the first part of the decision, I think that everyone should read the ACTUAL opinion before expressing opinions. This thing is FULL of ammunition for future pro-conservative cases. It holds that Congress has to actually pass laws, Congress can't just "let" things happen, that courts can't fill in the gaps where Congress refuses to act, on and on. There's this gem:

Likewise, courts have no proper role in the adjustment of reservation borders. Mustering the broad social consensus required to pass new legislation is a deliberately hard business under our Constitution. Faced with this daunting task, Congress might sometimes wish an inconvenient reservation would simply disappear. Short of that, legislator might tiptoe to the edge of disestablishment and hope that judges -- facing no possibility of electoral consequences themselves -- will deliver the final push. But wishes don't make for laws, and saving the political branches the embarrassment of disestablishing a reservation is not one of our constitutionally assigned prerogatives. "[O]nly Congress can divest a reservation of its land and diminish its boundaries. " So it's no matter how many other promises to a tribe the federal government has already broken. If Congress wishes to break the promise of a reservation, it must say so.

Blogger Rakshasa July 10, 2020 2:54 PM  

What I can't figure out is why VD doesn't see this as the opportunity of a lifetime to become a wise learned elder of a free and prosperous tribe.

Blogger A rebel without a General July 10, 2020 2:56 PM  

Now let’s see if the Supreme Court will allow the south to leave.

Blogger ADS July 10, 2020 3:01 PM  

The legal eagles on 4chan said that the only thing this really changes is exempting tribe members from state laws inside the reservation area. They're still subject to all the federal law bloat.

With all the talk of reparations for blacks and anybody else, native Americans have the strongest claim on historial wrongs. As the lines are drawn in the US Balkanization, I hope they carve out decent territories for themselves.

Blogger FreedMind0102 July 10, 2020 3:02 PM  

I'm in favor of flagrantly cheating on treaties where it benefits us but there hasn't been an "us" in a very long time

Blogger Crew July 10, 2020 3:02 PM  

Won't the Indians stake those hardened criminals out over some ant hills?

Blogger Damelon Brinn July 10, 2020 3:06 PM  

Not to mention the native-born hardened criminals currently establishing law-free zones while the media and authorities do everything possible to cover up for them. Rule of law? That's for the suckers who choose to follow it.

Blogger VD July 10, 2020 3:06 PM  

What I can't figure out is why VD doesn't see this as the opportunity of a lifetime to become a wise learned elder of a free and prosperous tribe.

Not my tribe.

Blogger Slicer July 10, 2020 3:11 PM  

Given that these are nations and that jus soli applies, if you're born on a reservation, doesn't that make you a member of the tribe by definition? Therefore, doesn't everyone born in Tulsa and the entire eastern half of Oklahoma now have legal standing as a member of the tribe?

Blogger Caesar Rodney July 10, 2020 3:14 PM  

If it were up to me, I wouldn't expect the United States to abide by any treaties, laws, or ethical code whatsoever. The USG has been completely converged, the efforts of the God Emperor notwithstanding.

Blogger Jack Amok July 10, 2020 3:17 PM  

The legal eagles on 4chan said that the only thing this really changes is exempting tribe members from state laws inside the reservation area. They're still subject to all the federal law bloat.

It is interesting that the plaintiff in this case would rather be tried for child molestation by his tribe rather than by the state of Oklahoma.

Blogger Karen took the Kids July 10, 2020 3:19 PM  

Supreme Court is one for two this week.

Blogger Azimus July 10, 2020 3:30 PM  

Ar first I was shocked, then I was appalled, then I came to VP and it dawned on me that this is awesome!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 3:31 PM  

Slicer wrote:Given that these are nations and that jus soli applies, if you're born on a reservation, doesn't that make you a member of the tribe by definition?
They are nations, by the proper definition. Jus soli most certain does not apply. Membership int he tribe is, and always had been, dependent on the membership of your parents. Members could be brought in from outside, but only by the consensus of the tribe.
Were it otherwise, my mother would have been a Sioux.

Blogger Azimus July 10, 2020 3:35 PM  

The Treaty of Fort Laramie 1868 that established the Great Sioux Reservation required (but never received) consent of 3/4 of Lakota males. Does that mean half of Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas are up for grabs too, I wonder?

Blogger jijijeac July 10, 2020 3:37 PM  

what i am really fascinated about in regards to social justice, is that for them, the further in the past a crime happens the bigger the punishment must be. like in the regular justice system most crimes are prescribed after a period of time but not in the social justice system where the further in the past a crime happened the bigger the punishment is. Like for slavery the salves themselves and their descendants didn't get anything but people who are centuries from slavery request a lot of things. Similarly here, the natives get half of Dakota based o the trail of tears although neither them nor their direct ancestors were involved in that. It is absolutely bat shit insane.

Blogger RB July 10, 2020 3:41 PM  

I am admittedly not very knowledgeable on this topic. But the one thought that I have is that the native Americans were not illegal immigrants. It is quite interesting to see how they have been treated compared to those who are.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 3:49 PM  

100 MPH speed limits, here we come!

Blogger bramley says "Enoch was right" July 10, 2020 4:01 PM  

I find this piece of news rather endearing. Won't bring back the buffalo though...

Does it mean that Indians are allowed to hold black slaves again?

Blogger Akulkis July 10, 2020 4:07 PM  

>> Given that these are nations and that jus soli applies, if you're born on a reservation, doesn't that make you a member of the tribe by definition?

No, jus soli does NOT apply for tribal membership. It's determined by parentage.

Blogger Akulkis July 10, 2020 4:10 PM  

>> Similarly here, the natives get half of Dakota based o the trail of tears although neither them nor their direct ancestors were involved in that. It is absolutely bat shit insane.

No, they get the territory that the treaty says they get.

This isn't difficult in the slightest.

No, jus soli does NOT apply for tribal membership. It's determined by parentage.

Blogger Valar Addemmis July 10, 2020 4:14 PM  

"Not my tribe."

Not his tribe, either. That was the weirdest part to me, since he was a Seminole on Creek land. Luckily for him the treaty seems to have lumped together all natives, I suppose.

Blogger Kraemer July 10, 2020 4:14 PM  

Vot are zese speed "limits" zat you are talking about?
-Autobahn supremacist

Blogger Edjamacator July 10, 2020 4:17 PM  

Reprehensible Adam wrote:Now how much money will it take to buy back the land?

Money? Why don't we just try blankets laced with smallpox again?

Blogger Michael Kingswood July 10, 2020 4:19 PM  

"the native Americans were not illegal immigrants"

No they weren't. The European invaders were.

The fate of the American Indian should be the greatest local example of why unchecked immigration is bad.

Blogger Kraemer July 10, 2020 4:20 PM  

Elizabeth Warren would really like to know the answer to that question

Blogger Archella July 10, 2020 4:24 PM  

My father's around 3/8 Lakota, so I'm just shy of being a member of the tribe. The way that side of my family tells it, the U.S. government keeps offering insane amounts of money for The Black Hills, which are tribal land but de facto seized, and the tribe keeps refusing. This ruling might lead to restoration of the Black Hills, which would be quite astounding.

Blogger Grooveware July 10, 2020 4:25 PM  

Some tribe that like to wear very small hats must be rubbing their hands, gold rush all over again for the lawyers.

Blogger gunner451 July 10, 2020 4:37 PM  

Really the Senate could solve this by formally ending all these treaties that were abrogated long ago. They never bothered as the courts never really allowed the Natives a fair hearing in court. Now really the only way to avoid chaos is for them to do that but politically it is probably impossible. I actually think that most Indians would be better off if the US just dissolved all reservations and allocated the land to each tribe member on a lottery basis and got rid of all the welfare. But none of that will ever happen although it should be interesting if this effects any Billionaire connected to the Democrats.

Blogger van helsing July 10, 2020 5:08 PM  

Roberts may get to enforce it too?

Blogger Mike Wallens July 10, 2020 5:10 PM  

It means little for Oklahoma. I suppose Indians are now free to molest their own children but they will molest non-Indian children at their extreme peril. There will be perhaps more smoke shops and crappy casinos also. Perhaps the Indians can get around to providing reparations to the descendants of black slaves that they brought with them on their trail of crybabies.

A few years ago the Cherokee booted out their former slaves but they have since rescinded that and "Freemen" are once again honorary Cherokees.

Blogger LAZ July 10, 2020 5:14 PM  

"Not my tribe."

Not that you would do it, but you can apply to change tribes.

Blogger Jeroth July 10, 2020 5:23 PM  

I just wish the reason for the decision was respect for the rule of law.

Blogger Greg from the Piedmont July 10, 2020 5:33 PM  

My mother's maiden name is relatively rare, and some of that name married into the Cherokee tribe before the Trail of Tears. They of course went west when the Cherokees were forced to leave. Years later when I had moved from North Georgia to Oklahoma and I was part of the 45th SIB OKARNG, I bumped into an officer who had the same last name. We talked for a while and compared notes. Yep, roots in North Georgia. Small world.

Blogger 1LLoyd July 10, 2020 5:37 PM  

You make sense. Which probably means no one will listen.

I do look forward to see what is worked out. I live in Arkansas, right next door. I need popcorn.

Blogger 1LLoyd July 10, 2020 5:39 PM  

Wow! Just wow.

Blogger Akulkis July 10, 2020 5:50 PM  

>> Not his tribe, either. That was the weirdest part to me, since he was a Seminole on Creek land. Luckily for him the treaty seems to have lumped together all natives, I suppose.

The complainant could have been a European, as his ancestry isn't the issue. The issue was who has proper jurisdiction for where he was? He pulled out the Treaty, and said it isn't the State of Oklahoma, it's the Creek Tribe.

Blogger Canada78Bear July 10, 2020 5:53 PM  

Cerno's assessment is spot on but it is also quite clear that Barr needs to move in and give the man charged a trial in federal court as he requested.

On the bright side, the tribes may order all the foreigners off their land and show conservatives how it is done.

Blogger JohnR219 July 10, 2020 5:58 PM  

Archella: The Lakota stole that land from the Cheyenne who stole it from the Kiowa. Who get it?

Blogger MrNiceguy July 10, 2020 6:04 PM  

Given the typical state of Oklahoma roads, *really* not recommended.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 6:09 PM  

Canada78Bear wrote:On the bright side, the tribes may order all the foreigners off their land and show conservatives how it is done.
Nope. Consider the problem of property taxes. Currently the state of OK collects hundreds of millions in property taxes on what is now considered tribal territory. The tribe is legally entitled to collect that money, and likely the state is not.
All other considerations pale in comparison.

Blogger Doktor Jeep July 10, 2020 6:16 PM  

This is a wonderful kerfuffle.

Blogger Crush Limbraw July 10, 2020 6:20 PM  

DaLesson? Don't make treaties - just conquer and settle the land.
BTW - I just happen to be going through Exodus again - learn something every time!

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 6:48 PM  

I guess I'm wrong on that. I did some research. State property taxes apply UNLESS the property is owned by tribal members.

Blogger Haxo Angmark July 10, 2020 7:09 PM  

hmmm....possibly a certain "Native American" expatriate could safely colonize a bit of this Indian Territory. VoxDay,

come home!

Blogger urthshu July 10, 2020 7:17 PM  

>>>Does that mean half of Montana, Wyoming, and the Dakotas are up for grabs too, I wonder?

Would be awesome. Not for the population of the states but for balkanization and disunion. A hard thing in itself yet a fast track to an amenable solution to our present troubles.

Blogger Valar Addemmis July 10, 2020 7:20 PM  

"The complainant could have been a European, as his ancestry isn't the issue. The issue was who has proper jurisdiction for where he was? He pulled out the Treaty, and said it isn't the State of Oklahoma, it's the Creek Tribe."

This is not correct. The State of OK still retains jurisdiction over crimes committed by non-native people in the affected territory.

Blogger The Last Roman July 10, 2020 7:22 PM  

I agree that treaties should be honored, but what a Charlie Foxtrot this might cause. Also, what happens if US policymakers take a Bismark approach and view the treaty as simply "ink on paper"? This could get ugly fast.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 7:27 PM  

The Last Roman wrote:Also, what happens if US policymakers take a Bismark approach and view the treaty as simply "ink on paper"? This could get ugly fast.
"Ink on paper" is all that gives them their power and authority. They cannot dismiss it. They all know they would be the first casualties in a Hobbesian war of all against all.

Blogger Jack Ward July 10, 2020 7:31 PM  

One result of this OK SC decision is that Trump may lose OK in the Nov. election. The non tribal citizens of OK may look at a Trump, so called 'picked' supreme court as having upset the whole of OK. Few, even the tribal members, will know what is best for themselves and their state. You can bet the dems will be making political hay with this since it probably will not be settled by Nov.3. The dems may be looking at this as heaven sent, which is ironic since most of them are not what I would think of as religious.

Blogger Poco July 10, 2020 7:38 PM  

It's just another scheme to undermine whitey.

Blogger John July 10, 2020 7:40 PM  

In the first place, Oklahoma is the fake homeland of the "Creek" Nation. Their only claim to the land is a piece of paper signed by Yankees. At least the Jews seized Israel by force and have successfully defended it from actual invasions. The "Creek" are not capable of defending anything and never were, which is why they lost their actual homeland in the first place.

In the second place, Americans & white Fake Americans owe nothing to the Yankee Imperium and its laws and treaties. We owe even less to the interpretations and pronouncements of the Fake American Government. No treaties or laws that it has made or re-affirmed, least of all with any of the many alien nations who live among us, are morally binding. When Fake America falls, there will be nothing to stop Posterity from reclaiming disputed lands, clarifying that American law is supreme over all the inhabitants of North America, and destroying those aliens who refuse to submit.

In the third, the place "Creek" nation has a mere 86,100 citizens. I think Truman killed that many Japanese in a single day.

In the fourth place, many alien tribes have colonized North America over the last 60 years, many of which now outnumber the "Creek" by orders of magnitude. If Americans and whites have perpetrated injustice against the "Creek" nation, there's plenty more injustice where that came from.

In the fifth place, whatever Christian obligations we have towards aliens in general or Indians in particular, there is no gold medal in heaven or on earth for pretending that an impotent vassal nation is in fact sovereign. On the contrary, we are learning why it is stupid to indulge in such delusions. Our "principled" government already openly treats us like second class citizens. We, today, do not owe the Indians any more than we owe the blacks or the Chinese.

In the sixth place, the Indians have succeeded in demonstrating that yes, All Native Peoples Are Like That. Noted.

In the seventh place, if the Yankee Constitution and its Reconstruction Amendments are meaningless and will be overturned, how much less troublesome is a mere treaty.

Blogger Matt July 10, 2020 7:44 PM  

Speaking of "correct decisions" looks like Trump will be commuting Roger Stone's sentence so he won't serve any jail time.

Blogger Jim July 10, 2020 7:47 PM  

Nick Rekeita does a quick breakdown. You will all be shocked to learned that the sensationalist headlines blasted by our esteemed Fourth Estate are not entirely accurate.

Blogger Poco July 10, 2020 7:53 PM  

It's open season on non-tribe members now. Feds aren't going to do any prosecuting of crimes committed by injuns against non-injuns. Just more anarcho-tyranny in store.

Blogger MidnightSun July 10, 2020 7:58 PM  

There must be oil in them there hills.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 10, 2020 8:02 PM  

Poco wrote:It's open season on non-tribe members now. Feds aren't going to do any prosecuting of crimes committed by injuns against non-injuns. Just more anarcho-tyranny in store.
This is just stupid. You have no idea of how things work on the Rez. Indian crimes are prosecuted literally every day, including currently in Oklahoma.

Blogger My 1 millionth internet profile July 10, 2020 8:07 PM  

Not for the population of the states but for balkanization and disunion

Disunion, sure. Balkanization? The great majority of white Americans have no real ethnic identity other than "American". Things will be far messier here.


I think that everyone should read the ACTUAL opinion before expressing opinions. This thing is FULL of ammunition for future pro-conservative cases

Because the courts care so much about precedents these days. If only we had more "conservative" judges, right?


Really the Senate could solve this by formally ending all these treaties that were abrogated long ago

In return we could offer to honor them by naming sports teams after Native Americans.

Blogger teslawasframed July 10, 2020 8:38 PM  

I'm an Oklahoma peace officer. All this ruling means is that Indians who commit crimes in the newly recognized "Rez" area will have to be charged under federal statutes instead of state/local. Most municipal departments, mine included, are cross-commissioned with nearby/adjacent Indian tribes and agencies, so aside from the lawyer/DA side of things, most law enforcement won't miss a beat.

Blogger My 1 millionth internet profile July 10, 2020 8:56 PM  

One result of this OK SC decision is that Trump may lose OK in the Nov. election.

Maybe, if most Americans didn't have the memory of goldfish and the attention span of a bug smashed on a windshield.

Blogger My 1 millionth internet profile July 10, 2020 9:34 PM  

Ted Cruz
@tedcruz

Neil Gorsuch & the four liberal Justices just gave away half of Oklahoma, literally.

Manhattan is next.


Dare to freakin' dream, Lalo, dare to dream.

Blogger Crew July 10, 2020 9:48 PM  

Is Trump about to betray Americans with DACA?

https://www.unz.com/isteve/trump-to-cave-on-dreamers/

Who knows. Wait three days.

Blogger Mast Abeam July 10, 2020 10:07 PM  

Hi Vox, you have champion in Snidely W.

Where I live the Seminoles and the Miccosukee (now) thrive after their experience with Jackson. Our tribes fled the trail of tears and headed south into the swamps of Florida. To this day FSU pays to “Fear the Spear” for the branding of an Unconquered Nation.

Today on I-95, 10 miles in the distant skyline still north in Ft Lauderdale, I said to my wife how disappointing the new Hard Rock Hotel doesn’t have a guitar neck extending to the sky.

She said, maybe too close to the airport. But after today’s ruling…

Blogger BalancedTryteOperators July 10, 2020 10:10 PM  

One result of this OK SC decision is that Trump may lose OK in the Nov. election.

LOLOLOL ROTFLMBO

no

Blogger rumpole5 July 10, 2020 10:25 PM  

If anyone deserves reparations it is the descendants of indigenous Americans. Just figure what the raw uninproved land in question is worth and put it in an escrow for the tribe to determine what to do with the money. Problem solved. The Federal government, the entity that violated its treaty and then sold or gave the land to someone else, should do the pay out.

Blogger Solon July 10, 2020 10:47 PM  

I read the SCOTUS opinion, and I agree with Vox: for all the shady stuff that Roberts has in his closet, his ruling on this is correct: that we have ignored legal issues in the past is no excuse for ignoring them in the present or in perpetuity.

His opinion basically says "that area is Indian land by ancient treaty, and if Congress wants to disrespect that, let THEM take the political backlash for it."

A lot of /pol/ is legally retarded and thinks this means that Indians are gonna get drunk, rape white children, and then get off because their tribal justice system lets them. It means absolutely nothing of the sort. It's just reaffirming the treaties of over a century ago, and telling the states/Congress to stop picking away at them, "either nut up and abolish them or leave them alone."

Its saying "these treaties are still in effect, and you dont get to do a run-around on them just because they're inconvenient." Surprisingly based for Cuck Roberts.

Blogger Joe July 10, 2020 11:54 PM  

"The foretold balkanization begins?"

They're counting on it. It's been in the works for at least 70 years.

Blogger liberranter July 11, 2020 12:29 AM  

And the appeal to "hardened criminals" walking free is a complete joke in a country that already has tens of millions of criminal invaders due to its failure to stop immigration.

Not to mention all the hardened criminals who are not only walking free, but are holding public office or retired from said office and enjoying a fat retirement, and running all the major corporations that are robbing and killing with impunity.

Blogger Arthur Isaac July 11, 2020 12:45 AM  

Native land is 200% $!thole. Now watch the same SCOTUS extend general welfare laws to enforce transgender bathrooms on tribal land. Can't wait for them to extend the precedent to the rest of the nation and we can see what it's like to have a different 0.1% ruling everything.

Blogger Emmanuel July 11, 2020 1:33 AM  

I fail to understand the consequence of this. I guess an additional step in the decadence of Weimar America.

From a litteral perspective, the idea that treaties matter is not the worst thing out of this.

Blogger JamesB.BKK July 11, 2020 1:34 AM  

That Irish article writer for RT who favors writing articles about places foreign to him didn't embrace the idea of complete expulsion of non-natives. I wonder what's to become of the assets and businesses of Phillips 66 and ConocoPhillips and associated master limited partnerships down around Bartlesville with pipelines everywhere.

Blogger DonReynolds July 11, 2020 8:21 AM  

Oklahoma is a half-mile from my house. I have worked as department head for the city of Durant, National Capitol of the Choctaw Indians. Vox is correct, nothing is changed.

Treaties of the United States are the highest law, exceeded only by the Constitution itself. Indians living in Oklahoma are ALREADY not subject to state law and local ordinance. They are only subject to Tribal law and what they call Treaty law, which is Federal. The local fuzz cannot even arrest an Indian. They can only hold an Indian until the Tribal police pick them up.

As Director of Planning, that means that zoning and subdivision regulations have no effect on households and businesses that are occupied by an Indian. Code enforcement, including the Building Codes, do not apply to Indian construction. We had 8 or 10 meth houses that had burned, but we could not deal with mess, because they were owned by Indians.

When I first arrived in Durant, the Choctaws were building a big hotel on their casino campus. My Building Official was making the required inspections and issuing the permits but any Red Tags were simply ripped off and ignored during his inspections. I directed him to stop making those inspections, if they are only going to be ignored by the Indian contractors. The Indians said that was fine with them and kept building. (Yes, there were a number of meetings on the subject.)

Short version. The expensive hotel was built with "white money" and they wanted to know that the building was being built according to code. The insurance company was a "white" firm, and they wanted to know that the risk of fire and other casualty was minimized by code standards. Now the Choctaw Indians wanted the inspections of the property and would correctly resolve the Red Tags. And me? My tenure as department head was terminated a few months later by the Indian city manager.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein July 11, 2020 8:30 AM  

doctrev wrote:If 85% of Oklahomans will just hand over half their state because 3 mouthy Hebrews and their pets said so, they deserve to lose it.

I, for one, welcome our new Native American/Jewish overlords.
The rest of y'all should, too!

Blogger The Rev July 11, 2020 10:32 AM  

Of course it is the right decision. It's bad for whites.

Blogger JamesB.BKK July 11, 2020 10:48 AM  

Is it bad for people of European descent that the Federal Govt or one of the several states should be held to honor (or to plainly and openly breach) its solemn promises including to those whose territories it has invaded?

Blogger furor kek tonicus ( my feelings don't care about your facts ) July 11, 2020 10:57 AM  

22. Slicer July 10, 2020 3:11 PM
that jus soli applies


not true.

jus soli only applies IF the nation in question is dumb enough to agree that jus soli applies and makes that position Law.

the Indian nations aren't that stupid.

pretty much every Indian nation offers Citizenship only on the basis of jus sanguinus.


24. Jack Amok July 10, 2020 3:17 PM
It is interesting that the plaintiff in this case would rather be tried for child molestation by his tribe rather than by the state of Oklahoma.


wrong on two counts:
1 - the maximum sentence under Creek tribal law is something like 3 years confinement, which by this time would result in McGirt being released on time served

2 - the actual ruling was about whether or not the Major Crimes Act was applicable. the Major Crimes Act says that various serious felonies ( which are detailed in the law ) *cannot* be adjudicated in Tribal Court but will instead be tried in US Federal Court.

this appeal by McGirt was a gambit to void his OK state law conviction
...
at the risk of getting himself prosecuted and confined in a Federal prison.

whether or not the Creeks actually ceded such authority and jurisdiction to the Federal government in their reservation treaty is yet another question which might well be appealable.



50. Akulkis July 10, 2020 5:50 PM
The complainant could have been a European, as his ancestry isn't the issue.


it most certainly IS.

this ruling is ONLY applicable towards Indians committing crimes on Tribal Lands. honkeys committing crimes on Tribal Lands are still subject to Oklahoma State jurisdiction.

although *why* Oklahoma State should have jurisdiction inside a reservation for ANY persons confuses me a bit.


72. teslawasframed July 10, 2020 8:38 PM
most law enforcement won't miss a beat.


Federal courts aren't going to enjoy it much. there's supposed to be something like 1,700 people serving time that this ruling could apply too.


78. rumpole5 July 10, 2020 10:25 PM
The Federal government ... should do the pay out.



sounds reasonable.

we just gave away 3 trillion, why not?

Blogger rumpole5 July 11, 2020 12:04 PM  

Exactly. We are in so much debt anyway, that the sums are approaching infinity: Query: How do you accommodate the new guest in your fully occupied infinite room hotel? Answer, do a robocall instructing each guest to move down into the next room, and put the new guest in the first room, which is now empty.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 11, 2020 4:05 PM  

furor kek tonicus ( the worst problem with being an inveterate smartass; no one knows when to take you seriously ) wrote:although *why* Oklahoma State should have jurisdiction inside a reservation for ANY persons confuses me a bit.
Tribes do not have territorial sovereignty. As worded, the treaties only reflect apply to tribal members, and have no application to Whites. The tribes are sovreign over their people.
Land ownership is another very complex question, but in general, there are three ownership modes. Either the reservation land is owned by the federal government in trust for the tribe, is owned by the tribe as a corporation, or is owned by individuals who may or may not be members of the tribe. If the land is owned in fee simple by tribal members, they are free to sell it to whomever they wish, and in Oklahoma, many have. The land held in trust by the US government may be disposed of by them (at the direction of Congress) in whatever way seems to them to best benefit the tribe. This is how Whites gained title to most of the land in the disputed area. Lands owned by the corporate tribe could be sold by the tribal council, but this happens exceptionally rarely. Indians generally understand the importance of owning land. Far more common is tribes buying land (near cities and highways) and petitioning Congress to add the and to their reservation, mostly for the construction of casinos. Congress has been quite willing to do this.
Indians on the reservation are subject to Tribal rather than State law. Indian-owned land on reservations is not subject to State property tax or building codes or most other regulation, but generally either are subject to excise taxes or have some negotiated settlement with the state that remits to the tribe the taxes collected by Indian businesses.
Again this is all extremely complex, and varies among the hundreds of treaties negotiated between the US government and the tribes, so anything I said above is like not true for some large subset of cases.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash July 11, 2020 4:08 PM  

rumpole5 wrote:Answer, do a robocall instructing each guest to move down into the next room, and put the new guest in the first room, which is now empty.
As long as he is willing to wait for the infinite chain to complete movement. Which would take delta(t) * infinity.

Blogger Avalanche July 11, 2020 5:31 PM  

@89 "although *why* Oklahoma State should have jurisdiction inside a reservation for ANY persons confuses me a bit."

Maybe to keep indian police from scalping non-indian offenders?

Blogger NO GOOGLES July 11, 2020 8:01 PM  

I find it pretty hilarious, to be honest. "Rule of Law" is a white people thing. Almost none of the tribes ever respected previous agreements vis-a-vis their conquered foes - Right of Conquest is a real, material thing.
I guess if white people are dumb enough to hamstring themselves with their own stupid rules their enemies would never abide by, that's their thing.

Blogger Akulkis July 11, 2020 9:46 PM  

Avalanche it's like status of forces agreements for US troops are overseas. If a service member commits a crime, they get tried by a US military court, not the host nation's court.

Blogger furor kek tonicus ( my feelings don't care about your facts ) July 11, 2020 11:43 PM  

79. Solon July 10, 2020 10:47 PM
for all the shady stuff that Roberts has in his closet,


it was Gorsuch who wrote the majority opinion, Roberts wrote the dissent.

in the dissent, Roberts biggest complaint is that the decision "creates significant uncertainty for the State’s continuing authority over any area that touches Indian affairs, ranging from zoning and taxation to family and environmental law."

which is
a - no duh, Sherlock
b - Congress' problem to solve, because it's a problem Congress created
c - certainly NOT an excuse for the Court to write Law from the bench simply because it would make things more expedient
d - yet more evidence that Roberts should be impeached and disbarred, that writing Law from the bench is his proposed solution to a problem created by established Congressional Act


93. Avalanche July 11, 2020 5:31 PM
Maybe to keep indian police from scalping non-indian offenders?



i might like you.


91. Snidely Whiplash July 11, 2020 4:05 PM
As worded, the treaties only reflect apply to tribal members, and have no application to Whites.


ah, so at the writing of most of the various treaties, the Indians often submitted themselves to their Great White Father in Washington?

that would explain the Federal jurisdiction.



92. Snidely Whiplash July 11, 2020 4:08 PM
Which would take delta(t) * infinity.


good thing the Federal Reserve can print infinite money with the press of a computer key, eh?



88. JamesB.BKK July 11, 2020 10:48 AM
Is it bad for people of European descent that the Federal Govt or one of the several states should be held to honor ... its solemn promises including to those whose territories it has invaded?



let me know when the Northern states start honoring their solemn promise to enforce the Fugitive Slave Clause of the Constitution.

because otherwise, the question of both the Law and the honor of solemn promises has been answered via the North invading and violating the South whilst murdering +500,000 Americans.

Blogger Paul M July 12, 2020 12:52 AM  

Caesar Rodney wrote:If it were up to me, I wouldn't expect the United States to abide by any treaties, laws, or ethical code whatsoever.
It never really has. Whether it's native indians, canadian softwoods, or torture.

Blogger JamesB.BKK July 12, 2020 2:08 AM  

I'd suggest it was not the north that invaded the south but rather Massachusetts and New York with foreign backing.

Blogger Laramie Hirsch July 12, 2020 3:54 AM  

VD, have you read the dissenting opinion? It's a fascinating read. I'm uncertain that I share your opinion. I've been going back and forth on this.

In reading Justice Robert's dissenting opinion, it looks like a lot of the handover of things was done by the Tribe's own leadership.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf

(I live here in OK.)

Blogger Jack Amok July 12, 2020 9:08 PM  

wrong on two counts:
1 - the maximum sentence under Creek tribal law is something like 3 years confinement, which by this time would result in McGirt being released on time served...


Like I said, interesting that he thinks tribal law will go easier on him.

Blogger urbane legend July 14, 2020 10:48 AM  

Michael Kingswood
"the native Americans were not illegal immigrants"

No they weren't. The European invaders were.


A goodly number of archaeolgists and historians have other views on who the "native Americans" actually were.

As others have pointed out in various ways, all land throughout history has been sold or conquered over and over.

Blogger urbane legend July 14, 2020 10:49 AM  

Michael Kingswood
"the native Americans were not illegal immigrants"

No they weren't. The European invaders were.


A goodly number of archaeolgists and historians have other views on who the "native Americans" actually were.

As others have pointed out in various ways, all land throughout history has been sold or conquered over and over.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts