2 ms·
Those claims are about how the original land grants were respected, not if they were respected. That may sound like mincing words, but it's an important distin
by refurb 4y ago
Those claims are about how the original land grants were respected, not if they were respected. That may sound like mincing words, but it's an important distinction.
- PaulDavisThe1st 4y agoFrom the GAO abstract: > identifies and assesses concerns regarding acreage transferred voluntarily or involuntarily after the confirmation procedures were completed "Involuntary transfer" is not what most people would describe as "respecting existing land grants".
- refurb 4y agoRead the details, it's because proof of land grants wasn't exactly perfect. Lots of claims but sometimes no concrete proof. The article calls out instances of fraud. I wouldn't say a few exceptions where challenges were faced mean the US didn't respect land grants. The paper itself says the vast majority has no issues.