5 ms·
The entire city of Tulsa is there - literally millions of non-native Americans live in this area. Congress will have no choice but to make a law breaking the p
by koheripbal 6y ago
The entire city of Tulsa is there - literally millions of non-native Americans live in this area.
Congress will have no choice but to make a law breaking the promise and repatriating the land out of Native American hands.
- falcrist 6y agoI think that's the intent of the ruling, actually. Part of the conclusion says "If Congress wishes to withdraw its promises, it must say so."
- JohnL4 6y agoAnd, so, in keeping with Gorsuch's minimalism. No re-interpretation of existing law, which makes the right happy (or did, until recently, I guess).
- falcrist 6y agoSometimes I wish the SCOTUS would reinterpret things that were obviously wrong... but I'd much rather have the SCOTUS interpret the law as it was intended, and have Congress fix the actual problems with the law.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- modmans2nd 6y ago“As intended “ isn’t “as it is written “. See the recent ruling that came down saying that LGBTQ people are protected under the civil rights act of 1967 because the words are very plainly written. Just because the people in congress probably didn’t intend to protect the LGBTQ community given the culture at the time the WORDS of the law are very clear.
- falcrist 6y ago"As intended" versus "as written" really depends on the law being discussed and the justice interpreting the law. For example, constitutional scholarship seems to lean heavily on interpreting the law by its intent rather than purely by the words
- koheripbal 6y agoI mean.... that case was neither "as it is written" nor "as intended". In that case the court simply ruled on what was morally right. LGBTQ people were not intended to be protected in the 1967 law, nor was it written as such. I agree they deserve protections and Congress should amend the law as such. It's sad SCOTUS is made to break its role to fix this.
- icelancer 6y ago>> obviously wrong Who can say what this is?
- mcny 6y ago> Congress will have no choice but to make a law breaking the promise and repatriating the land out of Native American hands. Oklahoma seems to have only five US Representatives (and two senators of course). It would be ridiculous if seven Congress members can hold a nation hostage. I don't understand the full implications of this ruling but I don't see how I can support breaking more promises because of political gamesmanship over five representatives out of four hundred and thirty five. From what I read in this thread, all crimes will still be prosecuted, but by a federal court of law. I don't see a problem.
- orthecreedence 6y agoWhat do you mean? One senator has been holding the nation hostage for years. One.
- jakemal 6y agoThe only reason one senator can hold the nation hostage is because he has the support of the majority of senators.
- aaronbrethorst 6y agoRepresenting a minority of the United States's population.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- nikanj 6y agoI'm out of the loop here, what are you referring to?
- jay3ss 6y agoI'm guessing that they're referring to Mitch McConnell
- advisedwang 6y agoThe ruling is about whether or not the state can enforce state law on Native Americans on this land. It doesn't change whether or how Oklahoma law applies non-native Americans.
- modmans2nd 6y agoOr they won’t?
- jeffdavis 6y agoWhat are the consequences to people in Tulsa who aren't tribe members? Landowners who aren't tribe members? Can the tribe expel them and confiscate the land?
- johnny22 6y agonobody knows what will happen yet. This is just opening page of that book.
- astrange 6y agoNothing. The tribe members lost that land with the Dawes Act before Oklahoma was a state. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawes_Act
- koheripbal 6y agoReal estate prices will likely drop.
- yellowapple 6y agoThere's quite a variety of ways that the Five Tribes and the State of Oklahoma / the federal government can resolve this, two of the extremes being "Congress formalizes its reneging on its treaties with the Five Tribes, thus fucking over Native Americans yet again, but in writing this time" and "Tulsa experiences karmic retribution in the form of Trail of Tears 2: Electric Boogaloo". Hopefully neither happens, and instead we get something that at least tries to work to the interests of both parties, e.g. "non-tribal residents are allowed to stay but are subject to tribal law (and pay "state" taxes to applicable tribal authorities instead of Oklahoma)" or "Oklahoma and/or Congress pays the Five Tribes a fair price for lands already occupied by population centers (e.g. Tulsa) and releases the rest to respective tribal authorities" or somesuch. Or perhaps something even crazier, like "the Five Tribes make another attempt at founding the State of Sequoyah" (with Tulsa being a decent-enough candidate for becoming a state capital). Realistically, though, knowing this country's tendencies toward addressing hard-to-solve issues, the most likely outcome is "nothing changes and Schrödinger's Indian Reservations continue to simultaneously exist and not exist".