Get this— the state of OK is arguing that since the government fucked over Native people in OK so much, it indicates Congress actually dissolved the reservation. So OK is using the historical persecution of Native people as an argument why their state should get to own the land instead of the Natives (aka fuck over the Native people more). Please read this. (Also, although it is not related to this case at all, you should read Killers of the Flower Moon).
Thank you for posting this. What an awesome article. I posted on FB for my legal geek, my immigration law geek and my Native American/NA rights friends to read. It's extremely well researched and written. The Atlantic has been doing some amazing writing. I can't wait to see what the current SCOTUS decides. (Gorsuch, I hope you are a surprise swing vote here.)
I grew up in Oklahoma, so this is particularly fascinating. Not just the implications, but the legal case as well.
There is no way they’ll actually give the land back, sadly. I’d be floored. But it’s an interesting argument for a murder defense.
If it was not legally distributed, they would have to. Old land cases like this fascinate me. There is so much that was not recorded "way back when", and when it's brought to light has far reaching consequences.
For all this to happen from a murder case is... whoah... mind blowing.
I grew up in Oklahoma, so this is particularly fascinating. Not just the implications, but the legal case as well.
There is no way they’ll actually give the land back, sadly. I’d be floored. But it’s an interesting argument for a murder defense.
If it was not legally distributed, they would have to. Old land cases like this fascinate me. There is so much that was not recorded "way back when", and when it's brought to light has far reaching consequences.
For all this to happen from a murder case is... whoah... mind blowing.
The land wouldn’t be “given back”; it’s more like the rightful owner would be recognized. Practically speaking, though, it sounds like there would be few implications on non-NA residents.
If it was not legally distributed, they would have to. Old land cases like this fascinate me. There is so much that was not recorded "way back when", and when it's brought to light has far reaching consequences.
For all this to happen from a murder case is... whoah... mind blowing.
The land wouldn’t be “given back”; it’s more like the rightful owner would be recognized. Practically speaking, though, it sounds like there would be few implications on non-NA residents.
That’s what I’m getting out of it. The article says it would be a psychological victory for Natives who view the land as a link to their history.
However, I’d be interested in if there is a tax issue. The article cites Tacoma, WA as being largely on a reservation. Does that mean the city has to pay something to the tribes? This seems ESPECIALLY likely in OK with its unique land divisions / mineral rights.
I just can’t believe the state’s argument and that the federal government filed an amicus brief agreeing yes, we were deliberately horrible to Native people which is evidence of how we actually severed their reservation territory rights even though we never FORMALLY got around to it.. How awful can we as a nation BE? I wish articles like this would tell me how I can support the aggrieved party.
(Also, although it is not related to this case at all, you should read Killers of the Flower Moon).
My book club read this!! One of our favs that lead to an awesome discussion!
I learned so much about the complexity of law governing tribes and land in Oklahoma from it. And the story itself- madness. My complaint is how much attention the author paid to the white guy.
Another Oklahoma native checking in. This is a fascinating read, especially since my family settled in Muskogee county in a teeny tiny town after immigrating from Lebanon and my grandparents lived there until just a couple years ago. I’ll definitely follow this.