Oklahoma Still Half Reservation, SCOTUS Rules

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder

So the TL;DR is Congressional laziness and ineptitude means the old reservation was never formally dismantled on the Federal level. Thus most of the state is still a tribal reservation, from a jurisdictional and law enforcement point of view.

Cannot blame SCOTUS for this, this is Congress being dumbasses and forgetting to handle shit.
 

Bacle

When the effort is no longer profitable...
Founder
And what does this change?
It's going to be a bit before we get the nitty-gritty of it.

But it will likely change at least a few law enforcement, tax, and representational issues in Oklahoma itself.

It may also open the door to more tribes making a case like this, beacuse I doubt the Oklahoma case is the only one where Congress didn't/hasn't bothered to act on formally dismantling a reservation.

Rules and taxes are a bit different on res land compared to state land, including inheritance laws on some reservations making it effectively impossible to pass down property.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
And what does this change?
Laws on reservations are quite different. They make their own laws. A lot of people will have to be released from prison because they are in there under state/county/municipal laws, which wouldn't apply to them.

Taxes are different. Land ownership is different. The united states has very limited jurisdiction.

And This includes the city of Tulsa.. the second biggest city in the state and 47th most populous city in the nation.

Realisticly what I see happening is Congress will have to officially dismantle the reservation. They plain and simple have to dissolve it. Non-natives aren't allowed to buy or rent property on native lands except under certain circumstances. The second most populous city in the state is on a reservation. That's kind of a legal disaster. From my understanding, this makes the entire city of Tulsa illegal, along with the rest of that half of the state.

I see some angry conservatives around the internet over this, Because the liberal side of the court pushed it, and it seems a little SJWish...but I kind of agree with the supreme court. The majority wrote (paraphrasing) that it isn't their job to do what Congress is too lazy to do. Congress would like inconvenient reservations to just go away, but the supreme court holds that congress needs to actually do their jobs. If they want it to go away, they have to dissolve it. It doesn't matter if it's politically difficult and inconvenient.

So we are probably about to see quite a fight happen not only internally within congress, but both democrat and republican, against the people. Because I can see lefty minded people being against dissolving a reservation, but statesmen and business minded people in congress, both GOP and D, are going to see how important it is to dissolve the reservation. They'll be forced to go against their own constituents, which they have been trying REALLY hard to suck up to. This will get very interesting. I see it hurting democrats way more than republicans, because left wing types of voters are going to be far more angry about dissolving a reservation than right wingers.

This happening right before an election could play right into Trump's hands.
 
Last edited:

Zawar

Active member
Laws on reservations are quite different. They make their own laws. A lot of people will have to be released from prison because they are in there under state/county/municipal laws, which wouldn't apply to them.

Taxes are different. Land ownership is different. The united states has very limited jurisdiction.

And This includes the city of Tulsa.. the second biggest city in the state and 47th most populous city in the nation.

Realisticly what I see happening is Congress will have to officially dismantle the reservation. They plain and simple have to dissolve it. Non-natives aren't allowed to buy or rent property on native lands except under certain circumstances. The second most populous city in the state is on a reservation. That's kind of a legal disaster. From my understanding, this makes the entire city of Tulsa illegal, along with the rest of that half of the state.

I see some angry conservatives around the internet over this, Because the liberal side of the court pushed it, and it seems a little SJWish...but I kind of agree with the supreme court. The majority wrote (paraphrasing) that it isn't their job to do what Congress is too lazy to do. Congress would like inconvenient reservations to just go away, but the supreme court holds that congress needs to actually do their jobs. If they want it to go away, they have to dissolve it. It doesn't matter if it's politically difficult and inconvenient.

So we are probably about to see quite a fight happen not only internally within congress, but both democrat and republican, against the people. Because I can see lefty minded people being against dissolving a reservation, but statesmen and business minded people in congress, both GOP and D, are going to see how important it is to dissolve the reservation. They'll be forced to go against their own constituents, which they have been trying REALLY hard to suck up to. This will get very interesting. I see it hurting democrats way more than republicans, because left wing types of voters are going to be far more angry about dissolving a reservation than right wingers.

This happening right before an election could play right into Trump's hands.
Yeah if it's handled like they've been handling most cases recently we could see a massive homeless population increase
 

Floridaman

Well-known member
Or ideally, maybe use the chance to make the following changes to reservations.
1. individuals of all races can own property, and Indians can sell their property, this would allow them to economically develop, since the uselessness of the land inhibits any attempt to improve them
2. basic crimes are still covered, like murder and rape still apply regardless of whether you are on state or reservation land
3. maybe use the opportunity to turn Tulsa into an American tax haven.
 

Nagaasha

Active member

So the TL;DR is Congressional laziness and ineptitude means the old reservation was never formally dismantled on the Federal level. Thus most of the state is still a tribal reservation, from a jurisdictional and law enforcement point of view.

Cannot blame SCOTUS for this, this is Congress being dumbasses and forgetting to handle shit.
It's going to be a bit before we get the nitty-gritty of it.

But it will likely change at least a few law enforcement, tax, and representational issues in Oklahoma itself.

It may also open the door to more tribes making a case like this, beacuse I doubt the Oklahoma case is the only one where Congress didn't/hasn't bothered to act on formally dismantling a reservation.

Rules and taxes are a bit different on res land compared to state land, including inheritance laws on some reservations making it effectively impossible to pass down property.
Fortunately, Gorsuch and co. restricted the scope of the decision to state and tribal criminal jurisdiction. In this instance, the rule change only removes state jurisdiction on cases involving a native defendant on reservation land. That being said, I fully expect this to get way crazier.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
They totally could. Congress could just abolish the reservation if they wanted to. Gorsuch just notes that they didn't.
Which, as I understand, is basically the entire point of the ruling. They're telling congress, "you don't get to just ignore inconvenient things. You didn't do this right, and now you're going to have to do your jobs properly. It's not up to the supreme court to do your dirty work."

I'm okay with that message. Congress...do your damn job.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
President Trump needs to official Reneg on the treaty and take the land. That is the easy fix, and deals far more justice than the Supreme court giving away half of a state on the behalf of a child rapist.
He can't. It's up to congress to reneg on the treaty. Most of the times that a single president renegs on a treaty, that treaty has an exit clause that the president is exercising.

And the child rapist is still going to be in jail, he's just going to be prosecuted by the Feds.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
Which, as I understand, is basically the entire point of the ruling. They're telling congress, "you don't get to just ignore inconvenient things. You didn't do this right, and now you're going to have to do your jobs properly. It's not up to the supreme court to do your dirty work."

I'm okay with that message. Congress...do your damn job.
Unfortunately, it's the one thing they have the most difficulty doing.
 

DarthOne

☦️
Laws on reservations are quite different. They make their own laws. A lot of people will have to be released from prison because they are in there under state/county/municipal laws, which wouldn't apply to them.

Taxes are different. Land ownership is different. The united states has very limited jurisdiction.

And This includes the city of Tulsa.. the second biggest city in the state and 47th most populous city in the nation.

Realisticly what I see happening is Congress will have to officially dismantle the reservation. They plain and simple have to dissolve it. Non-natives aren't allowed to buy or rent property on native lands except under certain circumstances. The second most populous city in the state is on a reservation. That's kind of a legal disaster. From my understanding, this makes the entire city of Tulsa illegal, along with the rest of that half of the state.

I see some angry conservatives around the internet over this, Because the liberal side of the court pushed it, and it seems a little SJWish...but I kind of agree with the supreme court. The majority wrote (paraphrasing) that it isn't their job to do what Congress is too lazy to do. Congress would like inconvenient reservations to just go away, but the supreme court holds that congress needs to actually do their jobs. If they want it to go away, they have to dissolve it. It doesn't matter if it's politically difficult and inconvenient.

So we are probably about to see quite a fight happen not only internally within congress, but both democrat and republican, against the people. Because I can see lefty minded people being against dissolving a reservation, but statesmen and business minded people in congress, both GOP and D, are going to see how important it is to dissolve the reservation. They'll be forced to go against their own constituents, which they have been trying REALLY hard to suck up to. This will get very interesting. I see it hurting democrats way more than republicans, because left wing types of voters are going to be far more angry about dissolving a reservation than right wingers.

This happening right before an election could play right into Trump's hands.
(puts down torches and pitchforks...for now)
 

Certified_Heterosexual

The Falklands are Serbian, you cowards.
I wonder if a similar situation might be applied to other states with large Native populations, like Alaska or New Mexico. Were other reservations/native land trusts improperly dissolved?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top