& a gallery of photos
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Monday, September 13, 2010
Native sovereignty
Inherent sovereignty under siege in Lara appeal Part Two
Posted: December 05, 2003 - 11:39am EST
by: Jerry Reynolds / Washington D.C. correspondent / Indian Country Today
http://www.indiancountry.com/?1070642490
But in the case of tribes, it came about much earlier because "we the Indian people," if you will, had been governing themselves in tribes for centuries. And so their inherent sovereignty is said to "predate the Constitution," as recognized in U.S. Courts and international law.
Centuries of antagonism from the British colonies and later American states is held to have extinguished inherent tribal sovereignty over former tribal territories now governed by the United States, or for that matter, states of the United States. This is the general basis for legal arguments that seek to find an extinction of sovereignty. But in negotiating treaties and pressing their legal rights in the U.S. courts, tribes have asserted a pre-existing inherent sovereignty over their own remaining territories, subject to oversight of Congress as the U.S. treaty-making power. This is the general basis for the legal standing of tribes as limited dependent sovereigns.
This is all pretty clear, and readily comprehensible despite the many Indians who speak of tribal sovereignty as if the "limited, dependent" part of the formula doesn’t apply, and the many more non-Indians who speak of tribes as if the "sovereign" part of it doesn’t apply.
But beyond these clear lines of thought, as egos and resources and competing priorities come into play, the limited and dependent, but stubbornly real sovereignty of tribes is subject to periodic legal sieges that would further reduce its arena of relevance. One such anti-sovereignty approach is to translate inherent powers, which require only the consent of the governed for its expression, into delegated powers, which rely on the will of the delegating authority.
Time after time, U.S. history demonstrates that political will is a major problem for tribes - which however justly courts may reason, congressional willpower may lag behind. The Marshall decisions of the early 19th century may have established the basis of tribal rights, for instance, but President Andrew Jackson famously suggested the chief justice ought to also enforce his rulings and instead proceeded with Cherokee removal. More recently, a judge opined that the Black Hills takings were as rank and dishonorable a piece of wrong dealing as the government has ever engaged in, but concluded that nothing could be done about it (beyond offering a cash payment) at this later stage of history. And only a month ago, Congress overruled the clear reasoning and just decision of the courts by stalling a court-ordered historical accounting of the trust funds - not because one isn’t past due or because Indian trust beneficiaries haven’t been harmed, but because the wealthiest nation in the history of the world can’t afford to pay for it.
A modern philosopher has noted that the "obstacles to comprehension" have less to do with understanding than with lack of willpower. In each of these cases and many others, it becomes clear the U.S. Congress could do what courts and the Constitution require of it if it had the will. As one commentator said of congressional intervention in the trust funds case, "If they had the will to do an historical accounting, they would find the money."
Against this background, the Supreme Court’s decision to hear an appeal in United States v. Lara could indeed prove to be a significant test of tribes’ inherent sovereign powers, as the Washington law firm of Hobbs Straus Dean & Walker LLP, long active in Indian-specific litigation and co-drafter of a "friend of the court" brief in the case, has already suggested.
Brief details of the Byzantine legal proceedings in the case were recounted in the first installment of this series; suffice to say here that by letting a lower-court ruling stand in Lara, the court would establish the principle that inherent sovereign powers, once lost, cannot be restored by Congress. If the high court overturns the lower court, on the other hand, the precedent will be set for replacing a tribe’s lost inherent sovereign power with delegated federal power - the kind that is subject to the political will of Congress before the reasoning of courts.
©2003 Indian Country Today
Posted: December 05, 2003 - 11:39am EST
by: Jerry Reynolds / Washington D.C. correspondent / Indian Country Today
http://www.indiancountry.com/?1070642490
WASHINGTON - The inherent sovereignty of tribes can be seen as the power of "we the people," the same power that founded America.
Centuries of antagonism from the British colonies and later American states is held to have extinguished inherent tribal sovereignty over former tribal territories now governed by the United States, or for that matter, states of the United States. This is the general basis for legal arguments that seek to find an extinction of sovereignty. But in negotiating treaties and pressing their legal rights in the U.S. courts, tribes have asserted a pre-existing inherent sovereignty over their own remaining territories, subject to oversight of Congress as the U.S. treaty-making power. This is the general basis for the legal standing of tribes as limited dependent sovereigns.
This is all pretty clear, and readily comprehensible despite the many Indians who speak of tribal sovereignty as if the "limited, dependent" part of the formula doesn’t apply, and the many more non-Indians who speak of tribes as if the "sovereign" part of it doesn’t apply.
But beyond these clear lines of thought, as egos and resources and competing priorities come into play, the limited and dependent, but stubbornly real sovereignty of tribes is subject to periodic legal sieges that would further reduce its arena of relevance. One such anti-sovereignty approach is to translate inherent powers, which require only the consent of the governed for its expression, into delegated powers, which rely on the will of the delegating authority.
Time after time, U.S. history demonstrates that political will is a major problem for tribes - which however justly courts may reason, congressional willpower may lag behind. The Marshall decisions of the early 19th century may have established the basis of tribal rights, for instance, but President Andrew Jackson famously suggested the chief justice ought to also enforce his rulings and instead proceeded with Cherokee removal. More recently, a judge opined that the Black Hills takings were as rank and dishonorable a piece of wrong dealing as the government has ever engaged in, but concluded that nothing could be done about it (beyond offering a cash payment) at this later stage of history. And only a month ago, Congress overruled the clear reasoning and just decision of the courts by stalling a court-ordered historical accounting of the trust funds - not because one isn’t past due or because Indian trust beneficiaries haven’t been harmed, but because the wealthiest nation in the history of the world can’t afford to pay for it.
A modern philosopher has noted that the "obstacles to comprehension" have less to do with understanding than with lack of willpower. In each of these cases and many others, it becomes clear the U.S. Congress could do what courts and the Constitution require of it if it had the will. As one commentator said of congressional intervention in the trust funds case, "If they had the will to do an historical accounting, they would find the money."
Against this background, the Supreme Court’s decision to hear an appeal in United States v. Lara could indeed prove to be a significant test of tribes’ inherent sovereign powers, as the Washington law firm of Hobbs Straus Dean & Walker LLP, long active in Indian-specific litigation and co-drafter of a "friend of the court" brief in the case, has already suggested.
Brief details of the Byzantine legal proceedings in the case were recounted in the first installment of this series; suffice to say here that by letting a lower-court ruling stand in Lara, the court would establish the principle that inherent sovereign powers, once lost, cannot be restored by Congress. If the high court overturns the lower court, on the other hand, the precedent will be set for replacing a tribe’s lost inherent sovereign power with delegated federal power - the kind that is subject to the political will of Congress before the reasoning of courts.
©2003 Indian Country Today
Native American Nez Perce & Salish woman Kola Anderson in black shawl
NARA Coast to Coast: Native American records across America
Native American Chief Tendoi & interpreter Geoge LaVatta @Fort Hall Rez 1923
Here is a site about finding records of Native American ancestors: http://blogs.archives.gov/online-public-access/?p=2329
Native American Chief Wilma Man Killer
Sunday, September 12, 2010
nude study of divinity 10
"When you cherish the unknown in yourself and in others you have become a Lover"- Kama Sutra
(1-12-10)
Sarah Palin Sunbathing
HOW COYOTE AND FOX FLEW TO THE UPPER WORLD
Coyote[Speel-yi'] and Fox planned to go the Upper-World People who were to have a great Feast of the New Food/New Food Feast. But they had no way of going. They studied and finally agreed to make a teepee, one that would sail through the air. They must have poles. Fox cut heavy, thorn-wood poles, thick and strong. They were crooked, and Coyote made fun of them. He cut straight poles of the cottonwood variety, such as Indians sometimes use for teepee building. They are easily broken. It was evening when their teepee was finished, and Wind told them he would take them up the next day.
Time for starting finally arrived. Wind came strong and lifted the teepee from the ground. Up it went, badly shaken and twisted about. Coyote's poles were broken, and he called Fox to help hold them together. Thus strengthened, the teepee finally landed in the Upper World. The Chief asked them who they were and where from, and Coyote replied, "We are from the Lower World. We came to be at the great Feast."
"You must dance seven days and seven nights before you can eat," was the Chief's answer.
"I always dance ten days and ten nights," boasted Coyote.
So Coyote and Fox began dancing. Three days and three nights they danced, and Coyote became sleepy. Fox held him up and made him continue dancing. At the end of five days and five nights, Coyote was sound asleep. But Fox held him up and danced the full seven days and seven nights. Coyote slept five days and five nights, and then they sat down to eat. Coyote sat singing, striking the ground with a stick. His beating made a hole, and he looked through it to the Lower World from where they came. The he thought to beat holes all around himself. It would surprise Fox. So Coyote continued to beat, and soon had holes all about himself. The ground he sat upon gave way, and Coyote fell with it. Fox looked down and saw Coyote lying in pieces, all smashed up.
Fox remained there a good while, and then traveled towards the sunrise. After about three snows traveling, he came to an old man and an old woman making hemp-cord. The spinning was done by rolling the hemp on their thighs. This they had done until their thighs were nearly worn away. Fox told them where he wanted to go, to get back down to earth, and they said, "All right! We will help you. We want deer meat, and you can help us." Then they let Fox down to earth with a strong string of hemp. He killed two deer, and the old people drew them up by the string.
Fox now went to where Coyote had fallen and was killed. Fox called and heard a faint answer. He found only the chin of Coyote, but he kept calling, and finally all pieces of Coyote were assembled together. Then Fox stepped over him five times, and Coyote returned to life. He stretched himself and said "Let's finish dancing." He had forgotten all about how he fell and was killed.
Sarah Palin sunbathing
Delicate intimate moments
"Every young woman needs to flourish in the space of her dreaming. Every young woman needs to live in the spaces between her dream of life and her dreams." -Dawn Wolf, Keeper of Stories
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)