advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
"Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Ted King
Date: July 09, 2020 11:11AM
Not sure of the ramifications of this, but it seems significant:

[thehill.com]

Quote

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that a large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Native American tribes in a huge win for a reservation that challenged the state's authority to prosecute crimes on its land.

In the 5-4 decision, the majority ruled that the disputed area covering roughly half of the state and most of the city of Tulsa belongs to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

"Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law," Justice Neil Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, wrote for the majority. "Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word."

The ruling could upend the state's authority over much of the land and restrict it from prosecuting tribal members who are accused of crimes on the reservation. Oklahoma may no longer be able to tax those who reside on the Creek's land.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: pdq
Date: July 09, 2020 11:24AM
The articles I’ve seen don’t seem to have much in the way of discussion of the economics. What about all of the oil/gas that’s been extracted over the years?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Ombligo
Date: July 09, 2020 11:45AM
From an article prior to the decision --
Ten states, from Maine to Texas to Montana, warned that the boundaries of tribal lands have jurisdictional consequences there as well. They said a decision in the tribe's favor "would be confusing and costly at best, and disastrous at worst," affecting health and energy policy, environmental regulation, economic development and taxes.

Post decision explanation --
The 5-4 decision (Gorsuch joined the court's liberal faction) means that only federal authorities, no longer state prosecutors, can lodge charges against Native Americans who commit serious alleged crimes on that land, which is home to more than 250,000 Native Americans.



“No persons are more frequently wrong, than those who will not admit they are wrong.”
-- François de La Rochefoucauld
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: samintx
Date: July 09, 2020 11:56AM
Lots of the South eastern OK land is timberland. Not sure about the quality of the oil in NE Oklahoma.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: July 09, 2020 12:33PM
The impact is far less than the headline suggests. There will be no changes to land ownership. But it is a significant victory for Indians and it's amazing to see a treaty upheld by the highest court. Could bode well for other cases that Indians have been pressing for decades in an attempt at treaty enforcement.

This article in Indian News Media clarified the case for me.
[indiancountrytoday.com]

as well as this piece from the Tulsa newspaper:

Jonodev Chaudhuri, ambassador of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and a former chief justice of the tribe's Supreme Court, said the argument about legal havoc in the state was overblown.

“All the sky-is-falling narratives were dubious at best," Chaudhuri said. “This would only apply to a small subset of Native Americans committing crimes within the boundaries.

“This case didn’t change ownership of any land. It didn’t impact the prosecutions of non-Indians in any way. All it did was bring clarity to jurisdictional questions regarding the border, and it enhanced the Creek Nation's ability as a sovereign nation to work with other sovereign interests to protect people and to work in common interests."


[www.tulsaworld.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Diana
Date: July 09, 2020 12:41PM
Thanks LD. I’ll read your links and then give my thoughts.

Diana



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/09/2020 12:43PM by Diana.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: July 09, 2020 02:37PM
Quote
Diana
Thanks LD. I’ll read your links and then give my thoughts.

Diana

Thanks Diana! Look forward to your perspective.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Lemon Drop
Date: July 09, 2020 02:44PM
From a friend who is Cherokee:

"Please don't misread today's court decision. It's very important, but listen to Five Tribes lawyers, indigenous and non-indigenous historians and legal scholars who are cautioning people to maintain the nuance and clarity on this decision, as sloppy enthusiasm can only harm tribal efforts going forward.

Saying that the court has "returned half the land claimed by Oklahoma" fuels right-wing propaganda against the decision.:


If you want to get (much) deeper into this I recommend the podcast "This Land" at crooked.com

[crooked.com]
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: bfd
Date: July 09, 2020 02:50PM
It's a huge step in the direction of fairness when it comes to treaties. So many of them weren't worth the paper they were written on, and the government knew it when they went into them. A wholesale plunder of indigenous peoples' rights ensued from then on. A few sharp bones have been thrown their way in recent decades - casino rights, etc. but more significant reparations are in order, too.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Diana
Date: July 09, 2020 08:05PM
All I have read on this topic has said that this applies jurisdictionally, not that the Tribes can take the land back and make a formal “reservation” as most consider that term. We have not had such, as you can drive across the state and see signs saying “Leaving blah-blah Nation” and “Entering this-and-such Nation”. If you’re not watching it you can miss them. You don’t have to consider that the property you are looking to buy lies within a certain Tribal Nation, or that may be a thing that affects its value. You also don’t see land set aside for only one kind of people, like other states have (and can be seen on a physical map of the state) known as an Indian reservation. If this decision begins to apply in other ways, such as the Tribes have water rights in NE Oklahoma they don’t currently have or whatever, then you will begin to see what they (the people of the Tribes) have had to put up with over the years. I’m not saying that it will happen, but it could; that is the fear that a lot of non tribal people will be expressing in the coming days. This appears to be the concern Justice Roberts was implying in his dissenting opinion.

If you consider what the Tribes have done, how they conduct themselves, how they are integrated within the state—I really can’t see that this will negatively affect them or the state. As an example: When the topic of tribal casinos first came up, there was a considerable portion of the state that said that it would be the worst thing they could do. Instead, it has brought money into the state and part of that has flowed into state coffers. All in all it’s been a positive for the state and for the Tribes, and has shown that most (if not all) of the fears expressed at that time were unfounded.

Let’s face it—this is flyover country. Most here don’t have much, and any people that get something that others don’t qualify for (and thus they can’t get it) are normally seen as “privileged” and the people of the Tribes have been described in that manner. The way I see it, this was agreed by treaty and it is about d@mn time the government at least acknowledged they have an obligation here to fulfill that agreement. I would like to see the Tribes take a part in the education of the kids within this jurisdiction, and it would be a hoot if they developed a better educational system than the state. Interesting times indeed! As far as the individuals who think that the crimes they have been convicted of will be overturned with this decision it will be interesting to see if they get a better deal by the feds or not. The only thing I can say is that the death penalty in those cases will be taken off the table. I don’t think that the Tribes will be any more lenient than the state if a case has to be retried through the Tribal system.

As stated earlier, SE Oklahoma is timber. Cattle ranching also occurs there, as the land is rocky and “mountainous” (at least for here). The mountains are old and quite worn down. NE Oklahoma is where the large reservoirs are located; it gets more rain and the trees are larger and more dense. As you move towards the center of the state, the forest gets shorter and the trees essentially end at Oklahoma City and the grasslands begin. The further west you go the drier it gets, and this part of the state is once again in drought conditions. The central part also grows wheat, usually winter wheat, as the spring time is when we get rain. The panhandle is wheat to desert, depending on conditions found there. Oil is found throughout the state. So yeah, we that’s what we got.

Also, we have a medical school, two large universities and a bunch of smaller universities/colleges, a medical research foundation (world class they tell me). And don’t forget the football, basketball, baseball and other sports.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: RgrF
Date: July 09, 2020 08:15PM
Who knew Diana could be so erudite?
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: Diana
Date: July 09, 2020 08:34PM
Quote
RgrF
Who knew Diana could be so erudite?

No one in my family, as far as I have been able to trace it (200+ years), have been named Diana. When I asked Mom where she got the name, she told me from a song she heard on the radio. I see you found it smiley-music039 !
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: RgrF
Date: July 09, 2020 08:40PM
It was written by a 15 year-old high school kid for his 20 year-old crush.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: "Supreme Court rules that large swath of Oklahoma belongs to Indian reservation"
Posted by: rjmacs
Date: July 11, 2020 09:02AM
I've learned not to be surprised by the breadth and depth of knowledge of the women on this forum.



rj
AKA
Vreemac, Moth of the Future
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 112
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 2330 on October 25, 2018