Supreme Court Gave 1/2 Oklahoma To Creek Nation Indians

And that includes the city of Tulsa. This sounded troublesome, but then I looked up the Governor of Oklahoma. It turns out he is a member of the Cherokee nation and has been working with the other tribal nations, so I'm sure the State will work things out.

Gorsuch sided with the four liberal justices in ruling that a large portion of Oklahoma was in fact “Indian country” for the purpose of criminal law. The 1866 treaty made with the Creek – now Muscogee – still applied, even if the state has exercised jurisdiction there for over a century, they said.

“Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word,” Gorsuch wrote.​

https://www.rt.com/usa/494321-supreme-court-oklahoma-indian/

 

Good.

 

I read that quite a few people are upset about it. Do you think Manhattan is next? Well one things for sure, the natives would do a better job than the current mayor.

 

They will have to come to some kind of compromise agreement. It's the only practical way.

The case itself was really just about jurisdiction in criminal cases, but it does have implications.

 

Good in what way?

 

Affirming the letter of the law(and treaty) is a good thing.

 

I think it will be fine. The nations will certainly work things to benefit their people but a strong relationship with all of oklahoma and a strong economy is to their benefit. There isn't two sets of opposing values at play.

 

No they don't. Just have Congress pass a law nullifying the treaty.

 

OK. There are millions of Oklahoma land and homeowners who will be hurt by it. None of them were involved in either the law or the treaty. It seems like another authoritarian federal government action. I oppose the whole thing.

 

Is trump going to be the first president to start with more US territory than he leaves with?
On top of the first to get a single vote from his own party to remove him after impeachment.
The third Republican to enter with a stable economy and leave with one in recession.
One of five that was placed in power against the will of the people.

This administration is one for the history books

 

Do you seriously think that millions of Okahomans are going to lose their homes over this? Not going to happen. This has more to do with jurisdiction in cases involving Native Americans than anything else. And there is nothing "authoritarian" about respecting your own treaties. Hell, authoritarian federal action is WHY most of these Native American families ended up forced to move to Oklahoma in the first place.

 

A president can nullify an Indian treaty like JFK did.

 

The natives sold Manhattan island. Not a good analogy.

 

Good point. I wonder how much of the land in question is currently being pumped or fracked for oil?

 

The sooner, the better.

 

LOL, that would be a typical move for a government long known for its mendacity and disrespect for the rule of law.

The Native American tribes have known for a long time that the denizens of Washington DC speak with a forked tongue.

It's amazing that SCOTUS actually upheld the rule of law.

 

The Supreme Court decided that a 19th century treaty made with the Indians should be upheld. The conservative Trump appointed judge agreed with the liberal judges and now half of Oklahoma is an Indian reservation. Does this mean that the people living on those lands have to follow native American laws and not state laws? Also will they be free from State taxes. As for their property, do they only own their homes now?

 

No, it just means Native Americans are under federal, not state, jurisdiction.

Nope.

Individuals in Oklahoma still own the same property they owned before.

 

What part of the "rule of law" states that all agreements and treaties exist in perpetuity?

 

The Constitution. Treaties are the law of the land until they are revoked. Treaties are treaties. Treaties are the law of the land. The Constitution explicitly says so.

 

The Native Americans wanted this, they were likely the Plaintiffs. Would you know what they gained from this win?

 

I decided to read and research instead of blindly falling for fake outrage. I encourage you to do the same.

 

That means it's a federal land grab. It seems to me like something George Soros and his Washington ideologues would want towards their liberal one world order/government. I personally believe in city/states. The smaller the government, the more freedom and individual rights people have. The bigger the government, the less freedom. In other words; tyranny and the enslavement of the masses.

Soviet Union anyone?

 

How is it a federal land grab when they are acknowledging the land as specifically NOT being federal? You guys need to work on you conspiracy theories. This one is just sad.

 

The plaintiff was the child rapist and his lawyer. The ruling was a nice surprise to the nations.

I think they gain more control over jurisdiction involving their citizens, zoning , taxation, land use by businesses, especially oil companies.