Supreme Court To Rule On Indian Land

Rhode Island Case Could Set A Benchmark For How Tribes Use, Govern Their Lands

(AP)  The Narragansett Indian Tribe bought a 31-acre lot in 1991, saying it would be used for "economic development" and housing for the elderly and poor.

However, the state of Rhode Island, fearing the tribe really wants to create a tax-free zone or build a casino, sued to block the Narragansetts from putting the land into federal trust, which would essentially free it from state and local law.

On Monday, their fight reaches the U.S. Supreme Court in a case being closely watched across the country because it could determine how tribes recognized after the 1934 Indian Reorganization Act are allowed to buy, govern and use land.

States' rights factor heavily into the case. The Bush administration sides with the tribe, arguing that the 1934 act allows it to take land into trust to benefit American Indians regardless of when their tribes were recognized.

Rhode Island and 21 other states want the Supreme Court to limit that authority because states lose control over tribal trust land within their own borders. They say trust lands can alter the character of surrounding communities, especially when casino income allows tribes to embark on major projects.

Rhode Island Attorney General Patrick Lynch said allowing the federal government to place the Narragansetts' land into trust would free it from state criminal laws and from safety and zoning rules, as well as allow operation of tax-free shops that undercut a financially struggling state's revenue collection.

"Criminals theoretically could go commit crimes in the rest of Rhode Island and hide on that land, and we'd be unable to go get them," Lynch said.

Narragansett Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas, leader of the 2,400-member tribe, scoffs at the notion that tribal land would become lawless and notes that many states have learned to coexist with tribal reservations. His tribe hopes to use its sovereignty as a bargaining chip to stimulate development.

"If you can give someone incentives to come to you and do business with you, that's how you draw them," Thomas said. "Where if you have nothing to offer, no one's going to come around."

The Supreme Court must decide whether the U.S. secretary of the interior can hold land in trust for tribes like the Narragansett, which was federally recognized after the 1934 law was enacted. The court also will have to clarify whether a 1978 land settlement between the tribe and Rhode Island puts limits on new trust lands in the state.

After buying the land in Charlestown, the tribe started construction on a housing complex for the elderly, but work stopped because of mismanagement and legal disputes, leaving a dozen empty houses. Thomas said he wants to complete the project and pursue some form of "economic development" on the site. He will not rule out gambling, and the tribe has unsuccessfully sought approval to build a casino in Rhode Island in the past.

Voters rejected a state constitutional amendment in 2006 that would have allowed the Narragansetts to open a casino in West Warwick.

Lawyers for the state and town leaders in Charlestown argue the Narragansetts cannot place their land in trust under the Indian Reorganization Act because the tribe was not recognized when it was passed. In their view, Congress wanted the act to help tribes that lost millions of acres during a forced assimilation campaign that began in 1887 - and the Narragansetts aren't one of them.

Disbanded by Rhode Island lawmakers in 1880, the Narragansetts sold off nearly all their remaining land in a murky deal and were not recognized by the federal government until 1983.

Indian rights advocates say Congress never meant to cut off tribes recognized after 1934 and say the act was supposed to set a template for future relations with tribes.

It is unclear how many tribes could be affected by a ruling in the Narragansett case. State and town attorneys estimate that several hundred tribes recognized after 1934 could find themselves unable to place new land into trust under the act if Rhode Island prevails.

Richard Guest, an attorney for the Native American Rights Fund, believes the number is more likely in the dozens. The legal fund wants to make sure any ruling does not go too far.

"We are concerned that they could reach broader decisions and reopen these challenges that go across the board," Guest said.

[mumu11]

And why ever not? It was their land first, wasn''t it? And now they can''t even finish to build housing for their people on land taken from them and that they had to pay through the nose to get back. I have no Native American blood whatsoever, but fair is fair.

[mumu11]

And why ever not? It was their land first, wasn''t it? And now they can''t even finish to build housing for their people on land taken from them and that they had to pay through the nose to get back. I have no Native American blood whatsoever, but fair is fair.

[sparks224]

We have a right-wing Court. We know which way this is going.
Why bother with all the pretense?

[drsuz]

Lawyers for the state and town leaders in Charlestown argue the Narragansetts cannot place their land in trust under the Indian Reorganization Act because the tribe was not recognized when it was passed. In their view, Congress wanted the act to help tribes that lost millions of acres during a forced assimilation campaign that began in 1887 - and the Narragansetts aren''t one of them...

Cool, then give the Cherokee''s back their land they were FORCED to leave and walk west (Trail of Tears)into "no mans" land..And leave the Black Hills alone while they are at it.

A Democrat controlled State and they say Republicans are bad..

[aztecdakota]

How come the Indians don''t have a "Supreme Court"? They were here first, at least a thousand years before "civilization" tried to holocaust them. They should and probably already have been judging the immigrants who took over their country.

[rudy654-2009]

And why ever not? It was their land first, wasn''''t it? And now they can''''t even finish to build housing for their people on land taken from them and that they had to pay through the nose to get back. I have no Native American blood whatsoever, but fair is fair.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by mumu11 at 11:39 PM

I completely agree with you.

[dsr57]

I love how you all keep saying that they were here first. Lets see them bring up a protest that one of you neighborhoods is on old Indian land and that they want ti back. I''m curious to see how many of you would just up and leave. It sure is easy to say it was their first when it dosn''t concern the land that you live on

[ffoulkes-2009]

Posted by DrSuz at 12:15 AM : Nov 03, 2008
+ report abuse
We have a right-wing Court. We know which way this is going.
Why bother with all the pretense?

_________________________________________________________

Right wing court? Those on the right tend to judge according to the Constitution and the laws of the land. Plus...who did the story say was pushing to let the Tribe have the land for whatever purpose it sees fit? BUSH!!!

[brianbwb-2009]

"...Lets see them bring up a protest that one of you neighborhoods is on old Indian land and that they want ti back. I''''m curious to see how many of you would just up and leave. It sure is easy to say it was their first when it dosn''''t concern the land that you live on" Posted by DSR57

Reading is fundamental.

"The Narragansett Indian Tribe bought a 31-acre lot in 1991, saying it would be used for "economic development" and housing for the elderly and poor."

They own it, having bought and paid for it, or now are you positing that they have no right to buy and own land?

[brianbwb-2009]

"If the Indians don''''t have to pay taxes, they should give back the beads and firewater." Posted by DeckardBR

By your logic we should then give back the land.

[dralex999]

Seems to me that all this shows is how greedy the state gov''t. is. Thinking that 31 acres can really make a difference.

[mick7744]

If those *** Indians don''t like the way we do things here...they should go back where they came from.

Oh...wait a minute...

[ddaymichael]

And why ever not? It was their land first, wasn''''t it? And now they can''''t even finish to build housing for their people on land taken from them and that they had to pay through the nose to get back. I have no Native American blood whatsoever, but fair is fair.

Posted by mumu11
*****************

Well spoken!

I also have no Native American blood and have always been rather glad of that fact. Not that I wouldn''t be proud to bear their noble heritage, but I''m basically a pretty lazy guy...and as a Native American, I''m certain that I would feel the overwhelming need to blow up a federal building a day...and that''s a lot of buildings.

These people were lied to, brutalized and murdered, given blankets in compliance with a treaty that had previously been used in smallpox and measles wards (yes folks...America invented germ warfare...thank you General Sherman)

Being robbed and humiliated by a Bush-packed Supreme Court should be relativly easy for them to bear. Kinda like how African Americans should never complain about being lynched.

They should be used to it by now.

[drivelphobe]

Indians, in my experience, are entitlement dependent bums, manipulated by the small groups of "tribal leaders", the Department of the Interior, and the BLM. The majority of the "tribal members" are not even Indian, but leeches and parasites faking genealogy to cash in on the freebies. They live in squalor, drug-infested housing projects provided by HUD, and use every deceitful trick to suck every last benefit out of the system.

It''s time to end this special handling and terminate the sovereignty of tribes. They might have been here first, but they were soundly defeated and it''s time to make them assimilate.

Their transparent attempts to enlarge their reservations and engage in the BS casino business, is a sham. They are as corrupt as any third world country and our politicians involved with them are no better.

[antizion]

While it has not been reported by the corporate propaganda news outlets, vast sections of the tribal lands in the US have succeeded from the US and are now totally independent nations. They are offering anyone citizenship that refuses to pay federal income tax.

There is great power in education and the tribes have been doing their homework. Perhaps if the entire nation did theirs, we might all live free and as equals instead of 1% of the population controlling 96% of the wealth.

[irmcvet97]

Right wing court? Those on the right tend to judge according to the Constitution and the laws of the land. Plus...who did the story say was pushing to let the Tribe have the land for whatever purpose it sees fit? BUSH!!!

Posted by Ffoulkes at 02:24 AM : Nov 03, 2008


I believe the OFFICIAL Position of the Reich is that the Court should interpret the Constitution as it was interpreted in 1776. The fact that WE today apply different meanings to the words contained in that document matters not to the Reich!

[brianbwb-2009]

"...but leeches and parasites faking genealogy to cash in on the freebies. They live in squalor, drug-infested housing projects provided by HUD, and use every deceitful trick to suck every last benefit out of the system." Posted by drivelphobe

Your statement is contradictory. If they are cashing in, then there must not be much cash, if they live, as you say, in squalor.

Your "make them assimilate" is a fool''s statement, why should they want to assimilate with such ignorant, hate filled people as yourself?

What''s in it for them?

The only thing that would change is they would have to bear the increased burden of taxes, and because of people like yourself, would get absolutely nothing in return.

[hitoyou1]

We have stole and Screeeeew the Indian for over 200 years. Why stop now?

[notmygop]

What the article doesn''t tell you is that the state already has authorized two slot machine casinos (both of which suck) and takes the majority of the profit from the owners. The greedy bums just don''t want any competition.

The article also doesn''t tell you the tribe also tried running a very small tax free cigarette shop. They were in business for a couple of days when the state police marched in, beat the *** out of some people while refusing to show their warrants, and shut the place down. How the hell that went by the courts with no convictions against the officers I will never know. Anyway, once again, this badly mismanaged, corrupt state couldn''t stand the competition.

After living here for two decades, I''m starting the feel like the state government is run by the mob.

Like this tribe could really build a decent casino on 31 acres anyway.
Gov. Carcieri is just a control freak. Always has been, always will be.

[piercetheval]

...Your Native American Neighbors...the Original Homeland Security!...[I am part Choctaw and Powhatan]

...How do you think we feel about the rest of the world coming over here and doing whatever pleases them?

...send my regards to Russell Means!

[drivelphobe]

brianbwb..

You know not of what you peak and it appears from observing many of your other posts, you take issue only to argue.

You accuse me of being hate filled and ignorant. You are the fool and all your posts reveal that on a regular basis.

Go suck an egg.

The freebies available to the general tribal members are minor, but to the entitlement minded, they want everything they can get. It''s similar to welfare.

I am very familiar with the Indian situation and what I post is fact that I have lived with for over 30 ears.

[rrozsa-2009]

Too bad we don''t seem to have learned a lesson from the Native Americans regarding the importance of border defense/controls, sound immigration policies, or the dubious value of sitting down and signing treaties with non-trustworthy governmental entities. ;-)

[newslink]

I am Native American, and I wish that the Supreme Court did not have to rule. Over anything that should be Native Americans any way. Old Habits are Hard to Break......

[barbaram99]

Dear American Indian
I am sorry I can''t spell that well. Yer here first. Yer kin. I am white. Yes I was born in America. Ye are the ones the lands were stolen under yer feet. I feel ye would have taken better care this nation than whites who put ye where they wanted ye to live. That same court want to tell ye what ye can and can''t do. Yer kin should have sent them back to their home nation.