From Jefferson through the end of the 19th century, our federal government, primarily because of manifest destiny, systematically took lands from American indians using a number of methodoligies. One, plain and simple, was viloation of land right uses given to Indians in previous treaties. Guess what, the Indians are now suing in court. Should the Indians be given lands they lost through our Federal governments violations be given back to these tribes?
2007-03-19 06:52:51 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
100 years ago, Indians were not allowed to sue in court as they were not considered americans, protected by American law, ahem.
2007-03-19 06:58:36 · update #1
Part of me says that they should get their lands back, but another part of me wonders what would happen to the people living on those lands if the Native Americans won them back.
2007-03-19 06:57:28 · answer #1 · answered by tangerine 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is a hard concept for many to consider. They feel if Natives got their land rights they would have to give something up. It really is a touchy subject.
Having said that the government is responsible to uphold these treaties. If they feel they cannot uphold the treaties they are responsible to enter into negotiations with Native people.
Treaties are not held up to the same types of laws such as statute of limitations. They are a government to government dealing. Natives absolutely have the right to sue and go to court so the government has to listen to them. You cannot go on ignorning a whole ethnic group of people.
Not only this but Native people should have the right to the land they already own. The government still holds some of the reservation land and their are several White land owners on reservation land who try to sell of their land to non-Natives.
In the least Native should have full rights to the land they now live on. Which in my opinion is not enough but is a good starting point.
If we want to have effective and positive race relations we need to start with common sense. We also have to acknowledge the past. It is not possible to move forward without acknowledging the past (no matter how many people believe the past is the past, it is simply not true).
Everyone has to remember that Natives are not trying to hurt anyone. They are not trying to take something away from you.
They are just trying to live happy healthy lives. Some Natives need a little extra land so they can fish and live sustainable lives, for example.
And to respond to a users comment about casinos. Natives don't make enough money from casinos for anyone to be annoyed by them. This is just a popular stereotype. Casinos are just one way Natives can make money for tribal housing, tribal health care, etc.. Services that all people need. They aren't hurting anyone, in fact they help provide basic essential services.
I am a Native woman.
EDIT: About tax laws. That is another law that has to be upheld. Natives aren't trying to manipulate anyone. The government needs to uphold treaties and those treaties state that Native land is independent (and therefor untaxable), it is not a double standard. And Natives not paying taxes on casinos etc... really isn't hurting the econonmy. Natives have such high poverty rates (because of oppression), it is good they can use money from casinos to help their people.
And Natives cannot be truly independent because the government won't allow it. It is hypocritical to say they shouldn't sue for treaties to be upheld unless they are completely independent because it is the American government that is stopping that from happening.
2007-03-19 22:41:46 · answer #2 · answered by RedPower Woman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My immediate reaction to Native American disputes is that the people now making 'complaints' on behalf of their forefathers are similar to African Americans lodging complaints about slavery...it is in the past, and does not affect them now. HOWEVER, laws are laws. And if treaties have been broken by the federal government, that is a seperate issue. Laws need to be upheld.
What becomes a slippery slope, however, is the fact that tax laws are not the same for Native Americans. You cannot suck and blow...there needs to be one law of the land going forward. So my opinion is to uphold treaties and the laws, and create new ones going forward. America is one country...and should have one law for all...
2007-03-19 14:30:22 · answer #3 · answered by Super Ruper 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
what's the statute of limitations on that sort of case?? I don't know... but anyway.. in my mind eminent domain would lead me to believe that the government can take over whatever land they see fit.. but the government has to reimburse you for that land... so give them the money they are owed.... but not the land.
P.S. If the land isn't in use now.. may as well give it to them instead of paying for it... someone may as well be able to use it.
2007-03-19 13:57:51 · answer #4 · answered by pip 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
no, but compensation would be good. However, reparations are being paid in the form of tax exempt status, reservations (hey, I didn't say they were desirable reparations) and extended gambling laws
2007-03-19 14:00:58 · answer #5 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Obviously. Isn't your question really just "Should everyone be equal under the law in America?"
2007-03-19 13:57:14 · answer #6 · answered by Longhaired Freaky Person 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
If Native Americans wish to reassert their sovereignty, perhaps they should be truly sovereign...and refuse welfare, unemployment, and other state and federal dollars.
2007-03-19 14:04:09 · answer #7 · answered by Rick N 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Nope
2007-03-19 13:56:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
there is a Statute of Limitations that makes these claims invalid; they should have sued 100 years ago.
2007-03-19 13:56:17 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Sure, give them back the land.
Just as soon as they pay back all of that casino money.
By the way, I PAID for my land...and it's NOT for sale.
2007-03-19 13:56:17 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋