Back On The Reservation: Implications of McGirt v. Oklahoma

Most SurvivalBlog readers have seen news and commentary pieces like this one, inked over at the Whatfinger.com aggregation site: Supreme Court Just Gave Back Half Of Oklahoma To Native Americans, Leftist Judges Uphold 1866 Treaty.

The ramifications of the recent McGirt v. Oklahoma decision are huge. I predict that this court ruling will be a key precedent and have some far-reaching Implications. It may even open the door for the Balkanization of the United States. This case sets a key precedent. Folks living on land that was formerly part of a reservation should particularly take note. Many reservations have had their boundaries truncated, over the years–and many of those boundary line changes were made at the state and federal level in abrogation of original treaty terms.  That was the crux of the McGirt decision.

In the 21st Century it is difficult for most Americans to recollect the broad expanses of land that were once inside of tribal boundaries. Most of these lands were expropriated more than a century ago, long before most of us were born. Here is just one example: The Nez Perce Tribe’s original and later tribal reservation boundaries. If subsequent court cases that rely on the McGirt case as a precedent side with the tribes, then a lot of land area may end up back inside of new, much larger reservation boundaries. Here a link to a zoomable map to study. It was drawn circa 1892. (This map is also shown in low resolution at the top of this article.)

Take a close look at the zoomable map that Tim Pool referenced. That map shows not just reservation boundaries but also “traditional” tribal land areas–some of which overlap. With those boundaries in mind, the McGirt ruling could have ramifications in just about every state in the Union except for within the original 13 colony states. As western expansion continued, America’s aboriginal tribes were progressively pushed “out of sight, and out of mind.” The Trail of Tears experience–with forced relocation of tribes to Oklahoma and then the subsequent Cherokee Strip land rush debacle–are black marks on American history. And the case might even have a secondary effect in places where no treaty was ever in force, but where “traditional tribal lands” have been identified. For example in Florida, the Seminole tribe refused to enter into a treaty with the United States government. If the courts are sympathetic, then they might be seen as holding antecedent rights not protected by a treaty, but rights, nonetheless.

A Coming Balkanization?

The McGirt decision might have both positive and negative effects. It might open the floodgates of Balkanization.  Notably, this July, 2020 Supreme Court decision came at an interesting time. Congress is about to take up the issue of statehood for the District of Columbia.  And here in the west, the Liberty State movement, the Greater Idaho campaign, and the State of Jefferson movement are all waiting in the wings. Those are more likely to takes years, if not decades to come to fruition.   But as Tim Pool pointed out, the McGirt decision might have a more immediate effect — in shifting the vote in the 2020 presidential election.

Jurisdictional Layers

People who already live within the boundaries of a modern reservation can appreciate the significance of living under an additional layer of jurisdiction. This already affects things like water rights, fishing licenses, and even speeding tickets. (Yes, tribal police can issue citations to non-Indians.) But the numbers of non-Indians that will come into nexus with tribal jurisdiction will dramatically increase, with the precedent set by McGirt v. Oklahoma.   There will almost surely be dozens of cases bought forward all over the country, echoing and citing McGirt.

Loss of State Rights?

One key aspect of McGirt is that it depending on your ancestery it might not mean adding a layer fo jurisdiction but rather substituting a jurisdiction.  Thus, if your deeded land ends up inside of a newly expanded reservation boundary, then you could conceivably shift from “County, State, and Federal” to instead “County, Tribal, and Federal” jurisdictions. Thus, you might lose some state constitutional protections. Further complicating this is the whole issue of Indian Ancestry and Tribal Enrollment. Some laws might only apply to individuals who are tribally enrolled. Ironically, because of the effect of Tribal Casino money, some tribes are now smaller than they were 40 years ago. (To keep the casino money “in the family”, some tribes have instituted strict modern-day Blood Quantum rules that would make a county judge in Mississippi circa 1920 blush.)

Land Expropriation? Probably Not

Some people might immediately jump to the conclusion that the McGirt decision will lead to the expropriation of land owned by non-Indians inside of shifted tribal boundaries. I really doubt that we will see that happen. But we could see some muscle-flexing by the tribes, particularly regarding other property rights such as water rights and mineral rights. And in a few years, there may also be some tax revenue issues that come to the fore. Take heed, dear readers: Whenever there is a foundational question regarding government, at any level, at the core it is always about two things: who gets control, and who gets revenue.

All-in-all, I believe that the effects of the McGirt v. Oklahoma decision will be positive. If nothing else, it will get people to look differently at the issues of territorial jurisdiction, in personam jurisdiction, and state sovereignty. It can only be when people no longer take for granted “the way things have always been” that they will begin to look differently at re-partitioning state lines to better reflect the current clash of cultures between urban and rural Americans. For that, we’ll be thankful. – JWR




54 Comments

  1. After reading a synopsis of the decision it appears to be based on the failure of Congress to formally “override” the treaty, basically leaving it in effect. The counterargument was that since Oklahoma was added to the US (made a state) the treaty was effectively dissolved. Court didn’t totally buy it (dissenters did) and now there is a major can of worms that will have to be handled (Tulsa is now within the tribal boundries). Don’t know how much this would apply elsewhere since many of the treaties were clearly broken/dissolved by different acts or laws of Congress so I don’t know how many treaties were glossed over (if any still are). Just glad I don’t have to figure it out. 🙂

  2. Water and mineral rights ARE land rights in the often arid west. Expect much extortion if this recent court ruling gets traction in the courts.

    Like socialism’s many failures, African-American demands for Reparation’s for “Slave Suffering” changing land laws and other rules of established law Mankind’s greed and Lusts will make all into ruin of America as we knew it. Every nation Every People took land from the losers, why should America be disassembled for doing the same?

    A House Divided cannot stand. Yeats wrote about how the “Center cannot hold” and history is littered with the destroyed empires that murdered themselves thusly.

    Rome did not fall to the Visigoths, the Visigoths were eating the carrion of a dead empire murdered by Powerful Greedy Traitors within, Mobs lead by demagogues controlling the streets and bad laws written by scared Roman Senators to give MOAR Bread and Circuses to those that did not produce (Welfare) until the solid silver denarii was but a cheap cast bronze coin glazed with silver, worthless.

    These will soon be called the good old days, prepare and brace for impact.

    1. A much to easy and onesided tale of the fall of western rome.

      The seed was laid much earlier, maybe indays of Caesar or Augustus and then Romes enemies grew stronger, then “desperate” in the west.
      Small tribes grew into mighty federations, forcing Rome to distribute more and more ressources to the western border defense and then came the huns.
      The goths came as fugitives and “allies”, Rome through betrayal, incompetence and/or lack of ressources made them enemies
      In the east the Sassanids replaced the Partians and wanted to conquer great parts eastern territory.

      Romes empereors drew their legitimation AFAIK from their protection of the empire, if an empereor with his army couldn´t protect a province he lost the legitimacy even if he fought another enemy at this moment

      1. ThoDan much of what you say is correct HOWEVER the death blows were Traitors with in the Roman Government, feeding the mobs and debasing the currency.

        No pay No Army, no pay no allied armies. Soon enough our dollar will be as “Strong” as the Venezuelan Strong Bolivar… that nobody in the world takes in trade. I am waiting until the Chinese force Saudi Arabia’s hand about the Petrodollar as already they have accepted both the dollar, the Singapore dollar and the Chinese Yuan for their oil so the Saudi’s are already broken their Kissinger deal.

        Not that the USA hasn’t accepted fugitives and betrayed allies making them our enemies eh?

        Nor have we weakened our military’s capacities trying to be the policemen of the whole world? Sort of like a multi-front small scale wars of keeping-expanding the roman empire?

        Can you name a war we’ve won lately? We are about to get tossed out of Afghanistan and cannot even force tiny economically destroyed Venezuela to change presidents on our command but we will try to make it sound better than that…

        1. If you mean with traitors those senators who wanted to conquer the Mediterranean, who ruined the free farmers by calling for service in war and conquest for years you´re right.
          The senators who murdered the gracchen and their land reforms destroyed the republic.

          Btw if Rome ´d refused the goths, they ´d reinforced the warhost of the huns and without the goths no victory against the huns at the cataulanic fields.
          Both great gothic tribal confederations on the hunnic side …

          For No Soldiers, Rome and Byzanz´d very effective Military, especially if you consider they´d much less resources and stronger enemies.

          The days of the dollar as the world currency is coming to an end, the only question will yhe dollar be one of the world currencies as well as the Yuan and the Euro, the wheel turns

          The US has betrayed allies since the war of independence and has used the policeman stance when it suited them,

          With what right do you want to dictate other nations to change to your orders?

          1. 1) A German scholar once drew up a list of all the reasons people have proposed for why the Roman Empire fell — the list had over 200 causes. The one I liked was that Roman population fell because Roman men liked to soak in hot baths and that lowered their sperm count.

            2) There obviously were multiple interacting forces but the question is what were the PRIMARY causes. In that regard, I think Kyle Harper’s recent thesis — that several pandemics and climate change were the primary factors — is rather convincing.

            3) There were three major pandemics – Antonine Plague (smallpox?) circa 165-180 AD which greatly weakened the Roman Empire , Plague of Cyprian (Ebola?) in 249-262 AD –almost caused the collapse of Rome in the Crisis of the Third Century and the Plague of Justinian (bubonic plague) in 451-549 AD which did much to finish of the remaining portion of the Roman Empire surviving in the East.

            4) These diseases were imported and rapidly disseminated due to Rome’s global trade. They hit the Roman Empire much more severely than the Germans and Persians because the Empire was much more urbanized. Where else do you find aquaducts?

            The many Romans living in crowded cities dropped like flies. That drove the elites to flee to the countryside and the decentralization of power that led to the feudal system.

            Lest you don’t get the point, note how the Wuhan virus was carried here from the far side of the world within weeks. New York City only has 2.5 percent of the US population but had 33% of the virus deaths in May of this year.

            5) The other factor driving Roman depopulation was climate change. Kyle Harper presents the large mass of physical evidence for a change in climate from a wet, warm one giving large agricultural surpluses to a colder, dryer one leading to crop failures and famine.

            That climate change on the Russian steppes drove the Huns to move eastward for less harsh living conditions –which in turn drove the fleeing Germans to invade the Empire.

            6) ThoDan was wrong when he said the authority of the Roman Emperors derived from their protection of the people. It derived from the Emperor’s ability to pay the Army — Rome had civil wars and multiple assassinations of multiple Emperors whenever that was forgotten. By 450 AD Roman citizens were welcoming German warlords so long that they gave protection from the Empire’s predatory tax collectors and corrupt judges.

            Depopulation, corruption and a declining economy makes taxes a much heavier burden —just go and ask the people of Illinois to explain it to you.

          2. 3 – 4 equals less Ressources and more Ressources were needed at the same time to fight stronger or more motivated enemies, this could only function for so long before the drain made the burden on the economy and communities to heavy and then the system breaks down.

            4 Not global, mediterran, the center and main road of communication was the mediterrean sea.
            Which allows a much more economical kind of trade then land OTOH we also know much more of the RE than the Persian.
            Maybe it was also hit hard by plagues and climate change, maybe the climate change was an advantage for them …
            But it had not an so economical and fast means of transportation than the mediterrean sea.
            So when the plague arrived in alexandria it would be very easy to spread it over the sea, but from massilia it´s a much more time consuming way to cologne

            5 Climate change initiated many such movements since prehistoric times, and the germanic-gothic tribes invaded the RE long before the first were tribes of Teutones and Kimbern IIRC it´s assumed that a stormtide forced them to leave their homes

            6 I ´m readying the moments a bit about the late Roman Army, the problem with this simplification is AFAIK roman military especially the classic legions has revolted against empereors even when they were paid(at least i know nothing that the legiones weren´t paid under Neros reign) and the armies of some bycantean empereors in time of crisis were tolerant with late or reduced pay
            Perhaps the legitimacy of their authority comes from their ability to protect the empire fits better.

            Corruption riddled the Roman Empire since it started conquering sicily at the latest, the system of the how the Roman Senate governed the roman provinces were corrupt, especially the “tax system”, roman conquest profited the class of Patricians and Equites but ruined the normal citicen the plebs.
            Who needed to accept those profiteers as patrons and serve them as clients, e,g. vote for their interests for food etc

            So the story of rome fell because of a start of decadence, corruption – parma et circenses isn´t so true.
            Parma et circenses were maybe more of an symptom, then a cause

            In Gaul, Galloromans(like their british cousins in the legend of Artorius Dux of Britain) led by their local leaders defended part of Gaul against the Francs, ignoring the wishes of empereors who wanted to use them as bargaining chips with the merovingians.
            Clovis was made Roman Consul

            Theoderic the great(legendary Hero of my childhood), King of the ostrogoth, was Roman Consul, Magister Militium and Patricius and was sent by an eastroman empereor to “re”conquer Italy

            So it´s much to easy to blame it on late roman corrption, decadence and treason.
            I think it´s more of a credit to the People of the late Roman Empire, that Rome held for over a millenium after the 3rd century crisis and that i believe there is something to learn from here for us all.

          3. ThoDan, what a stinging truth: “The US has betrayed allies since the war of independence and has used the policeman stance when it suited them.”

            I was raised to believe in the virtue of this republic. Was taught that it was unsullied. Three years in the Marine Corps began my education of disillusionment, which continues to this day.

            Carry on, in grace

          4. 1) The diseases that destroyed the Roman Empire came in via GLOBAL trade routes, not Mediterranean ones. Diseases of Mediterranean origin would have struck the Romans centuries earlier.

            2) The Antonine Plague (smallpox) was first? noticed in a Roman army advancing eastward into Mesopotamia but may have been picked up in northern Vietnam by a Roman expedition to India and China ( a similar plague hit China around the same time. )

            3) The Plague of Cyprian (Ebola?) appears to have been imported from Africa by the Red Sea trade to Alexandria.

            4) Recent DNA analysis suggests the Plague (Bubonic ) of Justinian was imported from the Tian Shan mountains of central Asia ( Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, and China) possibly carried by invading nomads or traders on the Silk Road.

    2. Congress regularly fails to act when it comes to the ‘housekeeping’ part of its responsibility. This goes in the bin with immigration law, firearms law, and scores of government programs that seem to exist only to employ federal workers.
      Another argument for a Constitutional Amendment imposing term limits on the federal legislature.

    3. Rome fell by the Roman men’s refusal to marry (they had to be legally compelled to marry), and by massive abortion and female infanticide.

      Boys don’t make babies. girls do. No girls, no babies, no future Roman soldiers.

      Most wealthy families only allowed one female child to live (see Rodney Stark on the gratitude inscriptions at Delphi – lots of boys, but only one girl in most of them).

      Also, the abortions were often not the mother’s wish.

      Read the famous, and heartbreaking, letter of an Egyptian merchant to his pregnant wife. He clearly loves her, reassures her that he will return to her, hopes that she delivers safely, and writes: “if it is a boy, you may keep it.”

      Female infanticide killed Rome; all other causes were secondary to the lack of Romans.

  3. Same thing coming soon to Montana with the Water Compact supported by Daines, Tester and Gianforte in Congress. Tribes will control the water over 2/3 of the state. Wake up folks! Do not believe the propaganda put out by the these Congress critters. Another thought to ponder on…is not the mere existence of Reservations, the setting aside a certain group of people, a form of racism?

    1. “is not the mere existence of Reservations, the setting aside a certain group of people, a form of racism?”
      I would say yes, and in their favor. It preserves some land for them to call their own. If they choose to sell the prime acreage to ranchers, that’s on them.
      Water is life, and nowhere is it more plain than our states. I have seen old men beat each other savagely with shovels over whose turn it is to use the irrigation ditch.

  4. This is creating a S storm which is what the libs wanted because we have held strong. This was punishment for supporting the President, religion, guns and the right way of life and being a part of Free America.
    Many of the criminals will be re-tried and just go to the feds but many will walk so good job putting child molesters back on the streets. SCROTUS should be proud of their chaos for the amerika but it ain’t going to deter us. President Trump needs to be more careful who he supports for SCOTUS.

  5. RE: Washington Redskins. How about the “Washington Politics”? Politics being a compound word of, “Poly”, meaning many, and “tics” meaning bloodsucking parasites. Therefore: Politics: many bloodsucking parasites. Washington Politics.

  6. In Oklahoma only tribal police may arrest a tribal member on tribal land. Only non-tribal police may arrest a non-tribal member on non-tribal land. Tribal land has been land given to tribes after the Dawes Commission set tribal membership and gave each tribal member certain acreage and giving up claim to all the land. Previously all of eastern Oklahoma was Creek or Cherokee land. This court decision appears to claim that did not legally happen.

    1. “Previously all of eastern Oklahoma was Creek or Cherokee land”

      then the indians themselves will fight each other over it. this might not the big problem (for americans) that it could be.

  7. I have lived in former land that is in question. Many years ago the tribe blocked a federal highway to show their control. The question of who was the “owner” was resolved by agreeing to open the road without the use of force at the time. However the Tribal police still make their control known from time to time.

    We were told that they held joint control and if stopped by them to comply.

  8. Given how the Department of the Interior tried to cheat the Indians out of $BILLIONS in royalty payments, I don’t think the Indians should get too trusting.

    https://www.voanews.com/archive/us-settles-historic-native-american-lawsuit

    Of course, the Department of the Interior has also been strangely reluctant to collect gas and oil royalties from their Big Oil buddies on behalf of the rest of us:

    https://www.tomudall.senate.gov/news/press-releases/udall-senate-colleagues-urge-interior-department-to-maintain-oil-and-gas-royalties-to-protect-western-state-budgets

    https://www.justice.gov/archive/opa/pr/2008/September/08-crm-818.html

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerals_Management_Service#Gifts,_gratuities_and_the_revolving_door

  9. I am a native Oklahoman and through my father’s interest, I have tried to become knowledgeable about everything that has happened to Native Americans in that state. At this moment and for several years, I have an 1879 map of Indian Territory showing all the tribal assignments right on the wall in front of my desk. With the exception of most of the Cherokee Outlet (not actually the Cherokee Strip which was in lower Kansas) ALL of the main current state was given to various tribes. This particular map even designates the treaties and paragraphs which did so. All of those treaties were eventually ignored by the federal government. Very little of the land assigned to the tribes still “belongs” to the tribes, but the areas are clearly marked along the highways and certain Native American tribal buildings remain either as monuments or currently in use. Several tribes have ascertained rights to taxes (or intentional disregard of them), car tags and most visibly, the casinos. Big business! The Chickasaws, Cherokees, Creeks and Choctaws have the most casinos and their incomes are substantial. The Osages were adept enough in the early 20th century to maintain some control over their mineral rights and did well in oil. This latest ruling changes the situation some and may affect some long standing issues on water rights. Balkanization? I don’t think so because the tribes may hold some sway within the appropriate courts, they don’t have enough members to populate and use the states tribal areas efficiently or over a long period to time. We’ll see.

  10. Interesting, informative, timely, and much appreciated! We’ll all be tracking the implications of this decision for some time to come. Some implications might be anticipated, but others may come as unfolding surprises. Thank you, thank you!

  11. I’m not totally sure but Vermont could also be ok as it arose from land within NY and NH and was an independent Republic back then. But even so I’m sure the good progressives of VT would happily agree to give away our land(other than the land that their own house sits on of course!)

  12. Pool says “leftist” judges did this….all while Gorsuch was a Trump appointee. This seems like a backdoor way to remove states from power and handing it to the Feds.

    I think with these Supreme Court decisions of late, it plainly shows that it matters not who we vote for President. They are all traitors, and sadly it seems that Republicans are the worst of the lot.

    1. Yeah but without the dog you aint got no life.
      This ruling now puts EVERYTHING in play like land ownership. The tribes can now just claim TULSA if you think about it . according to SCOTUS they are in charge

      1. They already tried to do that with Riverton, WY and were soundly rebuffed by federal courts. Now all is in jeopardy again. Make no mistake, living under the nepotism that comes with tribal government will be a complete disaster for non-Indians. If this comes to my home on the border of the Wind river Reservation they better bring a BIG cash offer or all the sober well-armed braves they can muster. The tribes here were nomads, ranging over vast areas and not returning to a place until nature had reclaimed their refuse. In these days of non-degrading refuse their old lifestyle has left mountains of trailers and junk cars in their front yards. If they want my deeded land they need to bring gold – not beads, blankets or whiskey.

      2. What would they ever want with a big city and all it’s problems? Far better for their own interests to keep the masses contained, yet there are power hungry leaders in the tribal structure, as with any group.

  13. The ruling noted the Tribal rights were created by treaty and can be extinguished by Congress. The power hungry elites in Congress may well move to repeal all such rights. Ironically that would be best for the native Americans. The tribes that have done well in this country are those NOT federally recognized.

  14. What would happen to Tulsa if the Indians decide to take over and all the non Indian population decides that they do not want to be in an Indian controlled home/business? I would guess a very large city with no revenue and all of it in ill repair.

    1. Exactly. Many non-Indians would leave, regardless of whether they got paid for their property. Life at the mercy of Indians here in western WY would be hellish, they would exact retribution for years of real and imagined slights against anyone, including each other. Their casinos have already failed this year, the pandemic closures were a final bullet after years of embezzlement by certain families in the tribe. The Arapaho and Shoshone have gravel, oil and gas royalties, and little else to sell to the world. On the other hand, with full restoration of their lands to them we could end the per capita payments and IHS, right?
      Still, no other conquered people have ever enjoyed the privileges our Indians have. It was always the Borg way – assimilate, or die – in every other culture in human history.

      1. You consider genocide a privilege?

        It was for a very long time in human history very different, e.g. the Persian Achämenid Empire, the Parthian Empire, the Moghul Empire, British and French Empire
        The late antique migration era e.g. the hunnisch whatever

        1. You missed my point. I was pointing out that American mercy ended the war on the Indians and has been supporting them through many special benefits – healthcare and education come quickly to my mind – in an attempt to integrate them as functioning citizens.

          Michael: I agree that no people is ever innocent, and there are always different perspectives. Some genius in Washington, DC one-and-a-half centuries ago decided it was a good idea to put two traditionally enemy tribes on this same reservation. SMH, that’s a person worth researching.

  15. RE: Ok and Scotus ruling. As this is near my neck of the woods, I have been following this issue. There is still some confusion if this will affect property rights (local articles say no, out of state opinions say maybe). As far as I can see it will be mostly about Tribal Indians arrested, who has jurisdiction over them and who can charge them. I believe there will be a lot of Indians in jail that were charged by the State of OK having their cases reviewed. I suspect there will be lots of small petty Indian criminals released. If they were charged & sentenced in Federal court (or by the Tribe) their sentence still stands, as I see it. Here is a couple of local articles that spell it out.

    http://www.newson6.com/story/5f08eaedfd72c4023b9f77b2/scotus-ruling-could-have-impact-on-oklahoma-criminal-justice-system

    https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/nation-world/supreme-court-rules-oklahoma-remains-tribal-reservation/507-a8c73d63-12e4-4e73-a714-b5cad25237db

    This one has comments by Senators, DA’s, Governor, etc

    https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/oklahoma-state-and-city-leaders-respond-to-supreme-court-tribal-ruling

    Still definitely a case to watch, as more lawsuits across the nation maybe coming.

    1. We kind of went through this here in WY about ten years ago, too. Things had gotten really rough on the reservation, drugs and alcohol had fueled a lot of serious problems and the BIA wasn’t able to maintain any civility. LEOs from many federal agencies came in, made cases and arrests, and set court trial dates in tribal court. Then dates or even times were changed and the prosecutors and arresting officers would conveniently not get the notice. It set the stage for both sides to better understand the limits in the future.

  16. Just looked at the map and I’m in the new Indian land. Here are the names of some of the towns near where I live. Seminole, Tecumseh, Shawnee, Harjo, Wetumka, Wewoka, Little Ax, Holtuka and the list goes on and on. Yes I’m a cowboy in Indian Territory, literally. Am I concerned? Not really because the one thing that the Indians don’t want to do is piss off the white man and cause us to leave. We keep money flowing. We are and have always been the Indian’s source of revenue. And I will say that we all seem to get along just fine. Unlike the conflicts between whites and blacks, Indians and whites live in harmony here in Oklahoma in my opinion. I just don’t think that they will want to rock the boat and create a conflict that doesn’t now exist. But maybe I’m over simplifying the whole thing.

    1. “maybe I’m over simplifying the whole thing”

      maybe. what you say about them wanting the white man’s revenue is completely true, but what about sheer chauvinistic tribal hatred? some of them will be quite willing to go back to crouching in the dirt eating half-boiled rabbit if they can look up and see no-one around them but their own kind – the question would be how many of them think that way.

      1. Howdy, I hear so much disrespect in your comments, I had to reply.

        Who made you the social police?

        What gives you the right to speak derogatorily of others by the way they sit or how they choose to cook and eat their food?

        Your intent to demean is obvious.

        For me, I have learned much from people in other cultures.

        I think it is only natural for people to feel safest with their own kind, hence, here we are on a like minded blog.

        Good and evil people come in every color, race and religion. To answer your question about how to respond after a grid down, Native Americans will be responded to just the same as anybody else!

  17. The Sioux in SD conquered and enslaved the Arikara not long before they were conquered. If they get the Black Hills do they then find Arikara descendants to give the land to? I remember a display in the “Journey” museum in Rapid City SD that euphemistically said the Sioux “displaced” the Arikara.
    If the Hills were given back to the Sioux, would that help their social problems? Would they embrace education, families become intact, reduce unemployment and give up the drugs & alcohol? In 10 years would they be better off?

  18. I don’t think the Indians will push too hard on things, as they could be outmanned and outgunned real quick. I’ve been through the Indian war in WI over spearfishing. Things were pretty tense for a few years, but have settled down. They want their casinos, which also have to be OK’d by the state, so they did everything to calm things down. Though the fishermen still have a sore spot over this, as most of the fish speared went into landing dumpsters instead of being needed food as the Indians claimed.

    1. “they could be outmanned and outgunned real quick”

      not after grid down. and they have a tradition of hunting-as-warfare – no idea how well they’ve maintained it but I’m sure they could pick it right back up again. all these preppers in their isolated cabins may relive the lone-pioneer-fending-off-indians scenes of the early frontier.

    1. Here there are reservation fishing licenses, which also serve as a “trespass permit” for hikers and backpackers. I believe hunting on tribal land requires a state license, and a native guide.

  19. How about ALL the Indian lands on the EAST coast…MASS,CONN,NY,NJ,DEL.RI,VA,WVA,NC,SC,GA,FL, and ALL OF THE REMAINING STATES…AND DC……since they were here first and had settled every where.

    SCOTUS….must be inclusive as they have been about everything else….as in a decision from THEM..Includes ALL of the United States for enforcement…not just a local area…

  20. End the reservation system. Give all Indians on reservations land which they own in fee simple and excess land held by a cooperation with each Indian being given a share in that corporation. End it, it is a anachronism that does not belong in the 21st century. All of the Indians are U.S. citizens and should be treated as such; neither better nor worse than anyone else.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.