Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Obama's Justice Department REFUSES to Investigate Illegal treatment of Freedmen
The Justice Department sent letters to Oklahoma Congressmen Tom Cole and Dan Boren on Nov. 9 stating it would not investigate five Oklahoma tribes for alleged illegal treatment of their respective Freedmen citizens.
The letter was in response to congressional members asking the Department of Justice to investigate the Cherokee, Choctaw, Creek, Chickasaw and Seminole nations for allegedly barring descendants of former slaves from full citizenship.
The DOJ replied it could not investigate because a case regarding Freedmen citizenship is in federal court. OP: WHAT? Each case is separate, or should be.
“It is the Civil Rights Division’s policy not to consider opening an investigation when matters are pending in federal court. However, the division will continue to monitor these cases as the litigation continues,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Ronald Weich wrote.
The pending case is Vann v. Salazar and is in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In the case, descendents of former slaves held by Cherokee citizens sued the Cherokee Nation and Department of Interior claiming they were denied citizenship and voting rights guaranteed by the Treaty of 1866 between the tribe and U.S. government Claiming? THEY DID
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
You're right O.P.
Especially since the five tribes are not defendants in the federal casess. The case are brought against the U.S.
I've pasted this next link, which is a pro Cherokee Nation law link,
(easily refutable regarding Freedmen)to demonstrate that the lawsuit was for the U.S to perform their duty, which they administratively refuse to do, more like Andrew Jackson and less like Abraham Lincoln.
That's why Congressional action appears to be the only recourse.
June 2, 2009
GENERAL MEMORANDUM 09-068
Justice Department Asked to Investigate Five Tribes in Freedman Dispute
http://www.npaihb.org/images/resources_docs/weeklymailout/2009/june2009/HSDW%20General%20Memo%2009-068.pdf
In addition,
Just another validation to the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma that they can stall through litigation any solution that the Freedmen Descendants seek.
They're betting on the Freedmen Descendants inability to finance the litigation, where the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma has the advantage. In Congress, financing justice is on a level playing field, thats why the Cherokee nation of oklahoma doesn't want a Congressional solution, except for Carcieri Fix. The likely-hood of that happening is looking real low with the Mohegan and Pequot defaults.
Mr. Lee, while congress might more of a level playing field it is not a level playing field by any stretch of the imagination.
Because Lobbyists and special interests control legislation.
Money gets them the chance to have their issues voted on and approved.
But you are right regarding the Freedmen that congress gives them a better chance but they should still keep pursuing the courts as well.
See what I said about the democrats being more of the same thing?
When Obama got elected some hard core democrats didn't like it when I said that the democrats should put their money where their mouth is regarding civil rights as they are often no better than the republicans are when it comes to our issues.
So where is this supposed party of civil rights?
I've never had a bias towards the Democrats, knowing their historical assc, with the KKK and lynchings, but I did vote for and support Obama's election from an historical standpoint. I still am proud of American citizens for putting the ultimate question to rest for Black Americans. As for Obama, he must perform his duties and I intend to hold him accountable as the president, not as a Black person.
Money does influence all branches of government, but influence peddling is the type of material that "Madoff" is made of. Most Reps. will probably try to avoid such associations in the near future.
Example of pro and con lobbyist for the Cherokee Freedmen Descendant
Pro lobbyist for the Freedmen are the (NAACP)
Con would bve the National Congress of the American Indian (NCAI)
both parties are believed to donate money to their favorite Reps. and their favorite causes.
Please educate me, what is a "Carcieri Fix"?
“…Weich also stated that the DOJ is representing the Interior in its defense against Vanns lawsuit and is working with Interior officials to develop the administrations response to the suit. …”
http://www.network54.com/Forum/237458/message/1259143165/The+pending+case+is+Vann+v.+Salazar
This is why they won’t do anything. The courts can rule against the Dept of Interior. They proved that when they reversed the Cherokee Delaware’s recognition granted by none other than the BIA. And most importantly, the Federal courts reversed the BIA recognition decision in 2005 based on the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma’s assertion of Treaty Rights based on the 1866 Treaty, the same Treaty that the Freedmen Descendants assert as their right to be Cherokee citizens. Odd that both nations so aptly defended the Treaty a mere five years ago in Federal court yet both are trying to excuse themselves from their obligations when it comes to tribal slave descendants. They also ruled against the BIA in the Carcieri decision, which lead to:
Hello White Buffalo,
Gov Carcieri of Rhode Island challenged the BIA's authority to take land into trust for the Narrangansett Tribe where both sovereigns share land. Clarence Thomas of the U.S. Supreme Court gave the majority opinion that the BIA could not take land into trust for tribes recognized after 1934?
Activists have lobbied Congress to correct this ruling by clarfying the intent of the Indian Re-organization Act so that tribes recognized after 1934 can take land into trust. This new legislative proposal has been dubbed "The Carcieri Fix" It hasn't happened yet.
Thank You
Maybe Pres.Obama thinks that civil rights are only for rich Tribal Leaders as long as they hand over millions of dollars to his Regime.
He conveniently overlooks the real problem in Indian Country, much easier that way.
What troubles me most about the federal position is that it is subtly attempting to give the "Green Light" for dis-affected Indians to take their own laws into their own hands.
The first problem with this is that federal law overlaps tribal law so that it restricts the extent to how much a dis-affected tribal member can really take their own tribal laws into their own hands.
The other problem is that it foments an age old race and under-class notion in America that it is OK for lessers in this country to lynch each other in the name of their own racially segregated or under-class justice.
I don't think the feds should make any intervention actions that deprive tribes of self-determination either, including membership decisions, but they certainly have the duty to admonish Nations that flagrantly violate the basics of Civil and Human Rights, with diplomatic negotiations, mediations between parties, santions, etc. The U.S. has done virtually nothing. They've done more to re-patriate Aristide back to Haiti and Benazir Bhuto(may she rest in peace) back to Pakistan than they have done to help re-patriate dis-enrolled tribal members back into their tribes.
Something that every U.S. official who claims a genuine concerned for Native issues should take note of.
"Bill Means: Another view of Wounded Knee 1973
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Earlier during that time in Wounded Knee Frank Clearwater was killed and half of his head was destroyed by a bullet from the FBI and US Marshals. Many of the young warriors in Wounded Knee were wounded in firefights with the Federal Forces and over seventy unsolved murders were documented between 1973 and 1977 in the aftermath of Wounded Knee. Wounded Knee represents a renaissance and a historical turning point for the struggle of Indigenous Peoples throughout the world."
http://64.38.12.138/News/2009/013378.asp
Let's GO HOLDER. Do YOUR JOB and INVESTIGATE the Cherokee and Chad Smith...
Unfortunate that the unjust disenrollments in California do not get the same level of press and media coverage as the Idle No More Campaign. When corrupt tribal officials disenroll their own members it is an injustice against tribal sovereignty equal to or greater than what Chief Spence is protesting about in Canada.
Unfortunate that the unjust disenrollments in California do not get the same level of press and media coverage as the Idle No More Campaign. When corrupt tribal officials disenroll their own members it is an injustice against tribal sovereignty equal to or greater than what Chief Spence is protesting about in Canada.
Post a Comment