4 ms·

>[In the only two stores, both in New Mexico,] under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians.

>[In the only two stores, both in New Mexico,] under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. That might just work out well.

b112 4y ago
[flagged]
- akuji1993 4y ago
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  We've already seen reservations try to legalize marijuana only to basically be shot down by the state/federal government. Tribal sovereignty has always been a thorny issue.
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    It's actually quite interesting. I don't know of many cases where regional autonomy (tribal or otherwise) actually becomes sovereignty. There's a small uncontacted tribe living on an island in the Indian ocean that legally is a part of India. However, the govt does not attempt to enforce the law and in fact actively prevents people from reaching the island.
    - jimz 4y ago
      India claims sovereignty over the Andaman Islands including the Sentinel Islands. Just because the islanders don't know/refuse to engage with the state doesn't stop the state from asserting their claim. Although, there are entities that are de facto sovereign and even have had the wherewithal to keep it with arms. Myanmar is home to more than one of these, actually. There's the Shan State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State), and within their de facto sovereign areas there are pockets of smaller administrative units that are armed and are also de facto sovereign, accepting nominal de jure Burmese authority over the authority of the nationalist minority independence movements, such as the Wa State with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army). Alas, the tribes here in the US don't quite have that kind of firepower, nor the desire to refight the latter half of the 19th Century. That's not to say that the relationships between tribes, the federal government, and state governments is any less complicated and at times contentious. The Supreme Court tends to favor tribal sovereignty as almost akin to that of a state, but not in all circumstances and where "full faith and credit" ends when it comes to tribal judicial authority when it comes to civil matters seldom actually represent actual "full" anything. Although tribes do have sovereign immunity so without congressional approval one can't simply litigate out every issue by suing the tribe, so the ambiguities are likely to persist.
  - b112 4y ago
    Not even sure why this comment/thread is flagged. More flagging abuse. My understanding is that now, in the US, due to a court decision being overturned, abortion is now seen as a state issue. This means that if Tesla dealerships are an option, so are abortion clinics, to bypass state law. I don't think drugs are, at least not completely, but car dealerships are seen as under the authority of the state. All it takes, is eroding the rights of tribal land, beneath that of the state, instead of equal to/immune to, and Telsa's plan won't fly. If I was GM, or Ford, or what not, I'd backdoor fund an abortion clinic on tribal land, then use that poliical pressure to pass laws, which would stand for years, at least, until being struck down. Once tribal land no longer has the power to flout state law, bam, no more Tesla problem for Ford or GM. Americans in the room: stop getting all emotional, and flagging things which meet your "us vs them" political blather, and start examining the implications instead. Even if the above "sneaky corporate play" is not the outcome here, this move by Tesla made me realise, a reservation is the a place where abortion clinics may fight the next battleground.

>[In the only two stores, both in New Mexico,] under an agreement with the tribal government, Tesla will train tribal members to serve as service technicians. That might just work out well.

b112 4y ago

[flagged]

akuji1993 4y ago
boomboomsubban 4y ago
We've already seen reservations try to legalize marijuana only to basically be shot down by the state/federal government. Tribal sovereignty has always been a thorny issue.
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  It's actually quite interesting. I don't know of many cases where regional autonomy (tribal or otherwise) actually becomes sovereignty. There's a small uncontacted tribe living on an island in the Indian ocean that legally is a part of India. However, the govt does not attempt to enforce the law and in fact actively prevents people from reaching the island.
  - jimz 4y ago
    India claims sovereignty over the Andaman Islands including the Sentinel Islands. Just because the islanders don't know/refuse to engage with the state doesn't stop the state from asserting their claim. Although, there are entities that are de facto sovereign and even have had the wherewithal to keep it with arms. Myanmar is home to more than one of these, actually. There's the Shan State (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shan_State), and within their de facto sovereign areas there are pockets of smaller administrative units that are armed and are also de facto sovereign, accepting nominal de jure Burmese authority over the authority of the nationalist minority independence movements, such as the Wa State with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Wa_State_Army). Alas, the tribes here in the US don't quite have that kind of firepower, nor the desire to refight the latter half of the 19th Century. That's not to say that the relationships between tribes, the federal government, and state governments is any less complicated and at times contentious. The Supreme Court tends to favor tribal sovereignty as almost akin to that of a state, but not in all circumstances and where "full faith and credit" ends when it comes to tribal judicial authority when it comes to civil matters seldom actually represent actual "full" anything. Although tribes do have sovereign immunity so without congressional approval one can't simply litigate out every issue by suing the tribe, so the ambiguities are likely to persist.
- b112 4y ago
  Not even sure why this comment/thread is flagged. More flagging abuse. My understanding is that now, in the US, due to a court decision being overturned, abortion is now seen as a state issue. This means that if Tesla dealerships are an option, so are abortion clinics, to bypass state law. I don't think drugs are, at least not completely, but car dealerships are seen as under the authority of the state. All it takes, is eroding the rights of tribal land, beneath that of the state, instead of equal to/immune to, and Telsa's plan won't fly. If I was GM, or Ford, or what not, I'd backdoor fund an abortion clinic on tribal land, then use that poliical pressure to pass laws, which would stand for years, at least, until being struck down. Once tribal land no longer has the power to flout state law, bam, no more Tesla problem for Ford or GM. Americans in the room: stop getting all emotional, and flagging things which meet your "us vs them" political blather, and start examining the implications instead. Even if the above "sneaky corporate play" is not the outcome here, this move by Tesla made me realise, a reservation is the a place where abortion clinics may fight the next battleground.