Can I smoke or possess one at the embassy of a different nation that doesn’t have an embargo against Cuba? How about at the U.N.?
This doesn’t necessarily have to apply to Cuban cigars. Phrased differently, the question could be: “Do sovereign Indian nations or embassies that are surrounded on all sides by the U.S. have to follow America’s embargos?”
Embassys can do what ever they want. You cant buy cubans at an indian reservation though. You can buy cuban cigars over the internet from spain though. Its still very much against the law.
mcihael
I wasn’t aware that the Mattawamkeag Bingo Hall counted as a “sovereign Indian nation”.
Happy to make you aware, then, Notthemama.
Where I live, a few Indian tribes have tribal boundaries, and are considered sovereign. They have their own tribal police, tribal courts, etc.
While some ties exist to the federal and state government, they are considered their own governmental entities in many (most) ways.
So, the Mattawamkeag Bingo Hall may not be counted as a sovereign Indian nation, but the property it is on may be.
I’ve often wondered what the limitations on Indian sovereignty are. I know they’re not fully independent nations, because they need state approval to do some things (like open casinos). But who decides the limits of their sovereignty, and on what basis? I’m guessing Congress, but if so, how are Indian reservations any more independent than, say, people who live in the District of Columbia?
How would the Reservation get the cigars? Customs can seize any and all Cuban Cigars entering the US no matter who buys 'em.
One other interesting facet of the laws as they stand is that it is illegal for a U.S. citizen to purchase Cuban Cigars anywhere (outside of a legal trip to Cuba).
So, even if the Reservation was able to get the cigars you could be stopped outside the boundaries of the reservation and prosecuted.
CheapBastid, while I agree the problem with the Indians getting their cigars is one of distribution rather than it being illegal per se (that is, how do you get them to the reservation without crossing US land/ airspace), I don’t know where you get the idea it is illegal for an American outside the US to purchase Cuban cigars where they are otherwise legal. You are not bound by US law in a foreign country. You are bound by that country’s laws, and if they say you can smoke 'em, go for it.
Having smuggled back a number of high end Cubans from Aruba, let me quasi-hi jack this thread by telling you that cigar affeciandos who I’ve gotten them for have universally told me that the things are wildly overrated. Everyone says the Dominican Republic cigars are far better.
Actually, as part of this same hi jack, I guess I should ask, what would have happened if I got caught? I didn’t worry about it thinking that if they had searched my luggage they would have just confiscated them and I’d be out the $50. Could I have gotten REALLY busted for this?
Just curious, so I know whether to rethink smuggling in the future. Actually we just brought back a number of quasi ‘live plants’ back from Martinique that also weren’t declared (just last week.) Whoops! 
Take another look at the laws and you’ll find that as a U.S. Citizen you’re bound by them no matter where you go. Sure they’re not really enforceable, but on the books nonetheless.
When you’re caught the cigars are taken from you (another fun tidbit is that unless you can prove that they’re not Cuban in origin they can still be seized - guilty unless you prove your innocence) and it is likely (as I’ve heard told) that your name get put The List’. The List being the one used to stop and search you on subsequent returns to the U.S.
And yes, there are many Cigars produced outside Cuba that are wonderful, but the distinct flavor of a Cuban Cigar is not matched outside Cuba. A well made and properly aged Cuban cigar cannot me matched (IMHO).
$50?
Either you only had a few singles, they were machine mades, or they were counterfeits.
I do not believe Indian Reservations need state approval to open a casino. The Mashantucket-Pequot nation opened the Foxwoods casino on their reservation despite very strong opposition from the state of Connecticut. As I recall, a federal judge ruled that the state has no jurisdiction on the reservation. Reservations and the people on them are still subject to federal law, such as the embargo of Cuba. Some Indian nations would prefer if the federal government didn’t have jurisdiction over the reservations, but of course it still does.
A Canadian friend of mine was on his way to Texas on business and took along a bunch of Cuban cigars for his American pals. A US customs officer poked through his luggage, saw the cigars, said “what is this?” as he crushed and broke them with his fingers, then smiled and waved my friend on through with a load of very expensive tobacco fragments. My friend was let off easy.
CheapBastid, I wasn’t aware it was illegal to purchase Cuban cigars in a place where they were legally sold. A couple years ago I took a cruise to Alaska, departing from Vancover and I really enjoyed smoking my Cuban cigar each night as the sun set and I looked out over the ocean from my room’s deck. No one on the U.S. sponsored cruise or the Canadian authorities said a word to me as I walked onto the boat.
bibliophage said:
The way its worked recently in my neck of the woods (northern Lower Michigan), the tribes basically strong-arm the states into allowing new casinos.
Apparently, it’s a lot easier to start a casino with state approval. Going through the Federal Bureau of Indian Affairs, part of the Department of the Interior, is a longer, more arduous process.
So the tribes here tell the states, “Approve our casinos, and we’ll agree to only build one, give you 8 percent of the electronic gaming revenues, and give a hefty sum annually to the local governments. Deny our request, and we’ll go through the Feds, get permission to build as many casinos as we want, and not give you a dime.”
The state has always opted to hold their nose and take their money, but Michigan Gov. John Engler is now claiming he’s drawing the line and saying “No more,” vowing that he won’t allow a new casino that’s proposed about 30 miles from my house to be built. Could get interesting.
This Indian sovereign nation thing is pretty nebulous. More and more tribes are coming out of the woodwork in Michigan (and I’d assume nationwide), no doubt so that they can make millions off casinos. In most cases, tribal boundaries are pretty easily discernable from old maps and records, as well as land they already hold. But one tribe near me has been recognized, and they hold no land.
They have tribal police vehicles buzzing all around a nearby city, but as far as I know, they can’t arrest anybody or write any tickets. What’s their jurisdiction? I think they’re still trying to figger it out.
Regarding my OP: I pretty much guessed that you couldn’t take the cigars off the reservation or embassy grounds. I was just wondering if it would be allowable while there.
And I wouldn’t think that the U.S. government could tell, say, the Russians, that they can’t take Cuban cigars to their embassy. Might be a bit different with the Indian reservations, however.
I’m going straight from the noodle here, so I will be wrong in parts. Nevertheless, this is a little primer for you dopers out there.
Indian sovereignty is guaranteed by Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution:
Congress reserves the right to regulate trade between the various nations, the states, and Indian tribes.
As brief as this, it is heavy stuff. It affirms a direct, government to government relationship between the United States and tribes. You know how many references there are in the Constitution to freedom of speech, right to bear arms, and fair trials? I’m pretty sure you can find the number inside this circle: O. Those were specifically enumerated in the Constitution’s footnote: the Bill of Rights.
In 1790, the President passed into law the Non-Intercourse Act, an ironic name, as it accurately describes the law’s intent: don’t fuck the Indians. Any land transactions with Indian tribes not approved by Congress is void. Period. The law has been reaffirmed numerous times by both Congress and the Supreme Court and is codified in 25 USC sec. 177. For reasons above and below discussed, statute of limitations, laches, and other defenses offered by land-grabbers do not apply.
Until the late 19th Century, the United States made official agreements with Indian tribes by treaty, as the U.S. would with any other foreign nation. Treaty law is the highest law of the land outside of Constitutional law. Former Washington state AG now Senator Slade Gorton’s efforts to the side, it is essentially inviolable. That’s why the Makah can hunt whales, and why Gorton Fisheries (yes, disgustingly self-interested relation) can’t violate treaty-guaranteed native fishing grounds.
Felix Cohen, who wrote the definitive text on Indian law, compares the status of tribes to several different entites: states, “defeated nations,” etc., but he underscores the fact that the status of Indian tribes is unique. The only other places in the world where their status is similar are Canada and New Zealand, and perhaps Australia.
However, as is obvious to anyone who has visited a reservation, Indian tribes have had a bad run of things. It was only after government corruption was brought under heel (trust me, it was worse than it is now) that tribal rights began to be accepted by the two branches of government other than the Supreme Court. The federal government now accepts the fact that it has violated its own law and principles in dealing with American Indians, and realizes that it now has a responsibility to attend to the needs of the shattered Indian nations, because they are the ones who allowed tribes to sink to the state they are in now. To do otherwise would be to acknowledge that the United States does not follow its own law, and therefore is not a viable political entity.
However, sheaves of case law, probably too much to effectively combat, indicate that tribes exist at the pleasure of Congress. Like states, they hold all the rights of states, excepting the ones that Congress has taken away. They’ve taken away a lot. Volume 25 of the Code of Federal Regulations can be viewed as a list of rights that have been taken away by Congress, and it weighs in at about a thousand pages. The term “sovereignty under seige” is a euphemism for this practice. One well-worded rider tacked onto an appropriations bill could effectively destroy the status of theses proud, noble, and horribly mistreated people. This has been attempted, by Slade Gorton.
Nevertheless, tribal governments (notice I do not say Indians–the feds only recognize the government and leave determination of tribal rolls to tribes themselves, within defined limits) do retain many rights that other less-than-foreign entities do not. As a result, tribes are becoming increasingly savvy in the use of litigation, lobbyists and campaign contributions to defend the precious status they hold, while attempting to improve their own lot through innovative exercise of their status. Did I mention that most Indian tribes, and their members, are extremely poor, the poorest in my country?
Usually, a tribe will attempt to exploit an advantage, say, to fishing or water and riparian rights, (state) tax-free cigarettes, liquor, or gasoline, waste disposal or gambling, and state and local lobbies immediately petition Congress to take these rights away from tribes. A compromise is usually reached, and each compromise erodes a little bit more of Indian sovereignty.
Gaming, which was perfectly legal on sovereign Indian reservations who allowed it, is now tightly controlled by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. About one fifth of Indian tribes have negotiated compacts with the states they are located in to develop casinos or other gaming centers. Most pay for themselves and give a small surplus for tribes to develop other much-needed facilities. A very few tribes have become fantastically rich. The proceeds of the gaming money can only be applied to the tribal government. That does not mean that a tribal government can’t decide to give some of that money back to members, or offer a million-dollar signing bonus to any person who qualifies for membership, as the Mashantucket Pequot Nation reputedly does.
Indian tribal law cannot contradict Federal law, so even if the reservation is lucky enough to have an airfield on it, they cannot fly in Cuban cigars, heroin, cocaine, or Johnny Walker Reserve. Conversely, state law can be easily contradicted by tribal law, unless of course it has shown some measure of success, in which case the NGA lobbies heavily to have that right, and the money it generates, taken away.
As you can guess from the above, I am not an impartial observer. But I do ask the following: pass the above information on to the next schmuck who says something ignorant like, “we beat them, didn’t we?” The answer is a resounding no. We negotiated a peace with tribes, in good faith, violated those negotiations at the risk of the United States’ validity as a government, and robbed Indian tribes of practically everything except their precarious status and their ironclad personal independence. The United States consists of fifty states and about five hundred Indian tribes. We should learn to live with it, not oppose it.
Damned straight, Cheap. I did a job a few years ago in Bermuda. Lovely place, but they drive on the wrong side. Anyway… a lot of the crew bought boxes of Cuban cigars. I told em to save their money, that they would all lose them. They told me I was being a putz.
Fine, fuck 'em. Every SINGLE box was confiscated, with stern lectures. Me, I brought back ONE in a cigar tube. Showed it to the Customs Lady. She looked at me, smiled, and waved it on untouched.
SOFA: What you mean WE? 
Neither myself OR my ancestors ever killed or stole anything from an Amerind, nor did WE violate any treaties with them. Nor has any Administration that was elected while I was old enuf to vote. Speak for yourslf, buddy.
>> “Do sovereign Indian nations or embassies that are surrounded
>> on all sides by the U.S. have to follow America’s embargos?”
Embassies are pretty much considered territory of the other nation and enjoy extraterritoriality of the host country. Diplomatic pouches can carry anything and cannot be searched.
If you are under the legal drinking age of 21 but you have a drink in an embassy where it is legal you cannot be prosecuted for that once you step out of the embassy. In fact, during prohibition, Herbert Hoover while secretary of commerce under Harding, would often drop by the Belgian Embassy at cocktail time. Most laws apply to the territory of the jurisdiction and do not apply outside.
The case of buying Cuban stuff is different because the law applies to American citizens where ever they may be. Not only that but the Helms-Burton act tries to apply to foreigners on foreign soil which is a bit ridiculous but in that kind of political juggling the law is in effect but “suspended” which seems to make the Cuban Americans happy enough and does not get the USA into any international trouble. You just have to love those politicians. Does it make sense that an American is breaking American law if outside the USA he buys some Cuban cigars but not if he has sex with children?
With respect to indian “nations” I have no idea what the legal situation would be but I will tell you I find the whole situation ludicrous. IMHO they should be subject like all other American citizens to all the laws of the USA.
It is very ironic that a nation that started out under the premise that “all men are created equal” today has more legal discrimination and privilege based on race than any developed country I can think of. This is really a case of having turned everything up side down.
If the whales should not be hunted then they should not be hunted. Period. The whale does not care who your grandparents were.
I remember some years ago there was a case of an indian parent who wanted to take her child off the reservation because she thought it would have a better life. I do not remember the details (maybe someone will remember) but the tribe said no way because we are losing our children and our identity so the child has to be educated here in our ways. The case went up to the Supreme Court who said the tribe did have jurisdiction and the child should be sent back. Unlike with Elian today nobody said a word then. IMHO this is barbaric and Indians should enjoy the same protections and obligations as the rest of Americans.
Why does the government of the USA feel the Indian Tribes should have the freedom to do what they want inside the USA but not the Cubans in Cuba? Why are they so keen on protecting the individual rights of Cubans against their government and not those of Indians against their tribes? I find it very ironic and very much a case of some being much more equal than others.
Daniel, if you are an American, there is a pretty damned good chance that neither you nor your ancestors wrote the Constitution, either, but you have inherited the rights and privileges guaranteed by it. You have also inherited the responsibilities that go along with those rights and privileges. One of those responsibilities is to obey the letter and intent of the law, and if we, the people, have violated our own law, it is our responsibility to make amends. You and me both.
Yes, at the Red Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota’s Lake of the Woods.
It’s the northernmost tip of the Lower 48.
I’ve done it. They taste just like the ones you would have just bought in Canada the day before.
They also taste just like legal “Cuban Seed” cigars made in Puerto Rico, to me at least.
The only land access to the reservation is from Canada, and the border patrol doesn’t mess with Indians, who go back and forth daily. Sort of a local peace treaty.
But if you manage to get allowed in, you’d better smoke your Cubans there.
There are very few outside visitors and trying to return to the US by boat is considered a sure sign of a rookie smuggler. Been tried so often, there are no new angles.
Basically, because we made treaties to that effect with these tribal nations. While it’s difficult to do, I think we need to abide by those agreements, simply to preserve national honor. I know that doesn’t mean much to a lot of people, but it would have no meaning at all if we never stood by our national promises. They’ve been abbrogated enough in the past, we should try to honor them now.
It is my hope that the tribes see themselves as part of the American people, and that they avoid actions that conflict with the American way of doing things. But we cannot legally constrain them to do things our way. We signed a contract allowing them their way of life, however they themselves construe it.
I realize that this is a pretty simplistic way of viewing the issue. But that’s because the heart of it is pretty simple. Do we honor treaties or not?