Dems call for DOJ probe of Five Civilized Tribes

Politics • May 2009 • Views: 496

(Interesting how this group never explored the ‘plight’ of Cubans of African descent on their little trip to Cuba, but they’re ready to take on this on-going issue. Give a liberal progressive a choice between almost any issue conflicting with tribal sovereignty, and its almost always tribal soverignty that will lose out.)

A civil rights controversy surrounding several Indian tribes could pit President Obama against some of Capitol Hill’s most prominent liberals and black lawmakers.

Reps. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), John Lewis (D-Ga.) and others asked Attorney General Eric Holder in a letter dated last Thursday to initiate a “full-scale investigation” of five Indian tribes for allegedly abusing the rights of the Freedmen: African-Americans descended from freed slaves once owned by Indians.

Recent Pages by dahozho:
As his cancer worsens, 13-year-old Minnesota boy and his mother flee Iraq--3 suicide bombings, including a woman with a small child in a food aid line Judge sentences Fort Dix defendant Dritan Duka to life in prison Prosecutors Urge Judge to Keep Technology Manager in Jail Dow Falls Below 7,000 For First Time Since 1997

Jump to bottom

3 comments

deacon May 5, 2009 8:49:44am

sounds like someone wants some casino money.

deacon May 5, 2009 8:57:08am

just did some reading, and found this.

Nevada v. Hicks stated that “it has been understood for more than a century that the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment do not of their own force apply to Indian tribes.”

Pretty sure they just want some casino money out of this.

dahozho May 5, 2009 9:12:40am

I don’t believe the Five Civilized Tribes have per capita payouts from their casinos— it all goes to the tribal government and programming.

This issue has been bouncing around literally since Reconstruction. Because the Five Civilized Tribes sided with the Confederacy (aside from being slave-holding tribes, there was really no choice after Union troops evacuated Indian Territory and Arkansas), and all treaties signed following the Civil War stipulated that the Tribes’ slaves be freed and accepted in the nations as citizens. While the slaves were freed, only the Creek and Cherokee ever (and reluctantly) accepted freedmen as citizens. This has been an issue ever since (including the screaming when DOI required the Choctaw to allow freedmen to vote in selecting a candidate for Principal Chief in 1952). The Choctaw and Chickasaw did not enroll freedmen even with Choctaw or Chickasaw blood.

So personally, I don’t know. The original decisions were certainly made in view of race and outright racism of the 19th and early 20th century. Should the tribes remain faithful to *their* promises under the treaties? How does this fit under decades of Federal court precedents allowing tribes to determine their own membership? It will be interesting to see if this goes anywhere…

Auto

This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!