SCOTUS; Half of Oklahoma returned to Native jurisdiction

The end of the article states this


Many Oklahoma public officials, including Republican Rep. Tom Cole and former Democratic Gov. Brad Henry, had urged the justices to rule in favor of the Native American tribes whose sovereignty they said has been good for the state.


Snip*

The nations and the state are committed to implementing a framework of shared jurisdiction that will preserve sovereign interests and rights to self-government while affirming jurisdictional understandings, procedures, laws, and regulations that support public safety, our economy, and private property rights," they said.
Yes, the Native American tribes has been good for the state because of casino revenue for taxation. Before that they were treated like blacks.

Blacks were treated better than the Native Americans until the Casinos...
 
  • Thanks
Reactions: 007
This ought to get interesting regarding non-native residents on the land and members of congress for those districts.
 
Indian nations are sovereign nations in the nation of the US
True.

This ruling has no bearing on their sovereignty. It only upholds the law that NAs in East Oklahoma must be tried by the Fed Gov for serious crimes or anyone tried for serious crimes against NAs.

That's it.

It is the CORRECT ruling, based on the law.

Congress can change it.

Gorsuch is a gem.
 
Well remember the land rush of 1889?

Looks like history might repeat itself, this time however it's going to be Indians doing the rushing. Maybe they'll be "sooners" too.
 
The 5-4 decision handed down in McGirt v. Oklahoma means nearly half of Oklahoma belongs to the Muscogee Creek Nation. The opinion was written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, who joined the Supreme Court in 2017 after he was nominated President Donald Trump. Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined the majority, with Chief Justice John Roberts writing the dissenting opinion.

In his majority opinion, Gorsuch pointed to the "sadly familiar pattern" that he said the U.S. has followed over the years in retracting promises made to Native tribes.

Happy times. Where to go from here. I think I know.
Yep... look for more tribes to sue for land. There's been an ongoing fight over the Black Hills and parts of MT and WY for decades. I say if reservation boundaries were made and signed into treaty, and then that treaty was broken, not honored by the US, then it rightfully belongs to the Native Americans that inhabited the land before we bull dozed them over. Shouldn't make promises and then not keep them.
In Oklahoma they just took the land.
That's pretty much what they did in the Black Hills when gold was discovered.
What I'm proud of most is how the Sioux butchered the Cheyenne in such a horrific way to steal the lands from them. Give it to the Sioux to give back to the Cheyenne. Would that work?

Every God Damned human being has the same instincts. No one is better than the other
I'm seeing that the Sioux and Cheyenne were actually allied with one another.
 
Those native tribes got some real fucked up liberal ass Jewish Democrat jurisdictions going on. Native Tribal police in modern cop cars with spinning red and blue lights to enforce the traditional guidance of village elders. Some of the darker German Jewish Democrats importing precious metals and selling kitschy tribal-themed knick-knacks and trinkets to tourists. Who'd-a thunk it?
 
Every God Damned human being has the same instincts. No one is better than the other
No they don't. I'm nothing like a leftist democrat. I can't even begin to wrap my head around how and why they think and do what they do, so my instincts are polar opposites of theirs.

Far as who is better, that's up to God to decide.

My point wasn't about any of that anyway. It was about broken treaties the US government made to native Americans, period. Yes the world is full of nations and people's bowling over other people's and nations and taking their land. It's been going on since the beginning of time, and that's just the way it is. But when our government promised land to the indians, signed the promise and then ignored it, that's wrong, and that's my point. Had our government NOT promised any land, NOT signed any treaty, then that's totally different.
 
Every God Damned human being has the same instincts. No one is better than the other
No they don't. I'm nothing like a leftist democrat. I can't even begin to wrap my head around how and why they think and do what they do, so my instincts are polar opposites of theirs.

Far as who is better, that's up to God to decide.

My point wasn't about any of that anyway. It was about broken treaties the US government made to native Americans, period. Yes the world is full of nations and people's bowling over other people's and nations and taking their land. It's been going on since the beginning of time, and that's just the way it is. But when our government promised land to the indians, signed the promise and then ignored it, that's wrong, and that's my point. Had our government NOT promised any land, NOT signed any treaty, then that's totally different.
1594388720468.png


I'm wondering if they'll form their own provincial state. That's what I want for the Great Sioux Nation based on the Ft. Laramie Treaty, but direct representation in the Federal Government will be good if those clans decide to form their own state. Ideally, I'd like every reservation to join a representative republic "reservation" state.
 
Every God Damned human being has the same instincts. No one is better than the other
No they don't. I'm nothing like a leftist democrat. I can't even begin to wrap my head around how and why they think and do what they do, so my instincts are polar opposites of theirs.

Far as who is better, that's up to God to decide.

My point wasn't about any of that anyway. It was about broken treaties the US government made to native Americans, period. Yes the world is full of nations and people's bowling over other people's and nations and taking their land. It's been going on since the beginning of time, and that's just the way it is. But when our government promised land to the indians, signed the promise and then ignored it, that's wrong, and that's my point. Had our government NOT promised any land, NOT signed any treaty, then that's totally different.
View attachment 361659

I'm wondering if they'll form their own provincial state. That's what I want for the Great Sioux Nation based on the Ft. Laramie Treaty, but direct representation in the Federal Government will be good if those clans decide to form their own state. Ideally, I'd like every reservation to join a representative republic "reservation" state.
Well, whatever happens, I just hope they get a fair shake this time.

Will also be interesting to see how much black lives matter inside in the Indian nation, and also if their voting rights are cut off. If they're declare a sovereign nation, then they shouldn't be allowed to vote in US elections.
 

Forum List

Back
Top