I drove past a sign yesterday that gave me cause to pause. I was in the Southern Tier of New York State on Rt. 86, east of Lake Erie but west of Corning. I drove through Seneca Nation tribal lands, and a sign proclaimed as much. " You are Entering Seneca Nation Territory".
I’ve been to northern Arizona. When leaving Flagstaff and heading east, one does indeed pass signs informing you that you have entered the Navajo Nation. United States laws no longer apply, the Nation is patrolled not by any United States law enforcement organization and any laws broken or disputes arising within those borders are handled by the governing body of the Navajo Nation. In Arizona, such things are made extremely clear by some signage on the side of the roadway.
However, I saw no such signage yesterday. I only saw the one sign announcing that I was now in the Seneca Nation.
Here’s the question. Did I indeed leave the United States of America at some point on that drive? I do when I enter the Navajo Nation, and within that the Hopi Nation in Arizona. The only other situation analagous to this kind of border crossing whilst ostensibly within the United States is when you walk across 1st Avenue in New York City and walk half way across the sidewalk towards the United Nations. You quite literally have left the country. ( Visitors taking the tour are always shocked to hear this, but it’s been a fact since that plot of land was ceeded to the U.N. upon it’s formation. While they do work closely with the NYPD, there is a UN Police force, and the land upon which the UN stands is not sovereign lands of the United States in any manner shape or form ).
What is the proceedure to actually declare legal borders if you are the governing body of a Native American Tribe? Shouldn’t I know very definitely if I have indeed left the United States, even if it’s only for 20 miles or less?
Just to back that up, the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs ( a unit of the Dept. of the Interior) is responsible for the administration of the 87000 sq. miles that constitute Indian Reservations around the country. If you literally left the country, then the BIA couldn’t administer these lands, correct?
In any event, the Wikipedia entry for the BIA clearly states that IR lands are lands that the US holds in trust for the tribes.
Assuming that’s true ( and, I do believe you ), then how can I be on Navaho Land, subject to their policing, laws and whatnot? Either I am on American soil or I am not.
American courts may “permit the use of lands” by Native american tribes, but that’s a far cry from surrendering political and legal controls. It’s a bit of a logic problem. The B.I.A. administers lands within whose borders the B.I.A. has no legal jurisdiction?
It should also be taken into account that Native American lands are not only within the United States, although reserved to the particular nation of Native Americans to whom they belong, but they are also within individual states, and their relationships are not only with the Federal government but within the quasi-sovereign states which comprise it. New York has a rather unusual relationship with its tribes, owing to treaties which preceded the formation of the U.S. I’m not clear on the details, but there were some major land-ownership cases deriving from those treaties and subject to State as opposed to Federal law about 15 years ago. (As it happens, the Oneida are using profits from Turning Stone Casino to recover legally some of their ancestral land – in 1997 they acquired a marina in Verona Beach, which was, I understand, set aside for the exclusive use of Oneida Nation members.
I live about a mile away from the Tuscarora Nation in Niagara County, NY, and I often have occasion to travel through Seneca Nation lands (of which there are now four areas). While the Tuscarora Nation borders are well-signed, signage at the borders of Seneca land seems to be inexact. For example, if you cross the PA/NY border on NY State 280, you will see no sign telling you that you have entered Seneca land; on US 219, you will, both south and north. You will also sometimes see interesting road signs like the last sign on this page" or other directional signs in Seneca.
In 2002, the Seneca Nation purchased a plot of land in the city of Niagara Falls, for the purpose of building a casino, and the plot was officially declared Seneca Nation territory. At the time there was some question over how local laws would be affected by this change, as this site asked:
There were also questions as to whether the non-native employees of the casino would fall under New York State employment law, or Seneca employment law. AFAIK, some precedent has yet to be set in Niagara Falls…
Yes, I saw the bilingual signs yesterday. Fascinating things.
The Niagra Falls article and quotes raises just some of the issues that most fascinate me.
Yes, Polycarp, states’s laws and sovereignty comes into play as much if not more than Federal- but there seem to be no clear lines here.
Out in Arizona, I kind of knew where I stood. In New York State, I felt like I didn’t. Heck, I never passed a sign clearly stating " You are now leaving the Seneca Nation" ( Or words to that effect ). I was on Route 86, the major east-west thoroughfare in the Southern Tier of NY State. If they didn’t demark there, I am guessing they didn’t demark it well anywhere…
The “short & sweet” version is: You didn’t leave the U.S.A., but you did, technically, leave the state of New York while you were in the Seneca Nation.
As to how their laws could apply, it works the same way as your being subject to the laws of whatever U.S. state in which you reside, or through which you happen to be traveling. Most of the crimes that some hypothetical person living in, say, the town of Corning (to which you referred in your OP), and commiting some act which is contrary to the laws of the State of New York might commit will be punished under the laws of the State of New York. If the Seneca Nation has managed to retrieve as much sovereignty as the Navaho Nation, they would have the right to do the same, just as the State of Pennsylvania would. However, it is my understanding that the Navaho (and other nations with similar levels of self-government) generally turn over non-Navaho accused criminals to the FBI, for punishment under federal law, which I believe is applied in much the same way as it is in the District of Columbia; in any event, the alleged offender is arraigned and tried in federal courts. Of course, the Navaho and similar nations do issue tickets and collect fines for traffic violations. However, where some more substantial legal transgression is involved, none of the “Indian” nations has the desire to discipline non-members (nor are they that stupid, to stir up hatred in the white people, most of whom still consider themselves superior to “Indians”, unless the person has transgressed against something they consider sacred); they merely wish to be able to punish their own people according to their own rules.
While the Seneca territory under discussion is considered to be a part of NY state, it isn’t exactly (maybe I’d do better to use a rez in another state which did not pre-exist the Union, but that’s the one you asked about). It is land which the U.S. government recognizes as belonging to the Seneca.
If anyone wishes to learn more, they might consult the following:
The Nations Within: The Past and Future of American Indian Sovereignty, by Vine Deloria, Jr. & Clifford M. Lytle. Originally published by Pantheon in 1984, reprinted with new preface and some added text regarding gaming in 1998 by U.Texas Press (ISBN 0292715986)[sup]*[/sup]
American Indian Sovereignty and the U.S. Supreme Court: The Masking of Justice, by David E Wilkins. The version I have is the substantially updated one published in 1997 by U.Texas Press (original published in 1954). (ISBN 0292791089 or 0292791097).[sup][/sup]
[sup][/sup]ISBN #s given for UTP editions; earlier editions were before the ISBN system was instituted.
All indian governments are subordinate to the federal government, similar to how state governments are subordinate. In theory native lands are not subject to state laws, but of course the greater power of the states and the well-known history of how the reservations were set up and managed has forced reservations to accept some state interference.
This is why reservations can run casinos. Most states (with Nevada being the exception) have state laws against casino gambling. If a reservation is not subject to state law then it isn’t a violation of state law to build a casino there. Although here in Washington the various indian tribes have to negotiate with the State government to build casinos, even though they are theoretically sovreign, because the State government could make things very difficult for them if the State becomes unhappy.
And the legal status of each reservation also depends on exactly what the treaty they were forced to sign said. Some tribes were forced to give up more rights than others, and of course many tribes were deprived of their rights de facto, and courts are just now starting to enforce treaty obligations. But the general gist is that the tribes gave up their independent status in return for not being exterminated.
So you don’t leave the United States when you enter a reservation, any more than when you enter Texas.
:eek: :eek: :eek: Poor analogy at best. Liberal? Take it to the Pit. You don’t see me attacking you, save the jerky comments or take them to the appropriate forum if you please.
The issues regarding not defying a State in wanting to build casinos are very much in the news where I live. Sullivan County New York may well see a few Native American Tribal-run casinos built- mostly using old Borscht Belt hotels and resorts. ( The Monticello Raceway being the principal exception to this ).
They are working with the state of New York, although from what I can see, if you are on your own lands, you can do as you please. Seems to me that if the various Nations wanted to really flex their muscle, they’d simply build casinos and damn the white folks. Then again, the balance of power is and always has been tipped towards the white folks- the Nations need to ask permission to open a casino on their own land, even though they don’t have to ask permission to do lots of other things.
This has nothing to do with rights, and everything to do with money, doesn’t it? :dubious:
Excuse me? I did not attack you. Nor did I make any jerky comment. “If only” meant “If only it were the case that the United States would grant actual sovereignty to peoples it had conquered by force, destroyed by holocaust, and relegated to subsistance on the most useless land it could find.” It was not intended to mean that I wish you had left the United States. Perhaps you might make inquiry before judgment or else assume the best rather than the worst.
Actually, I chose Texas on purpose, since it was an independent country before petitioning to join the United States. The various tribes were also independent entities, although they gave up their sovereignty to the US by force.
Right. I wonder where their status sits now. Begrudging granted a bit of demi-sovereignty? Some make more definitive use of that granted sovereignty than others, or is it negotiated tribe by tribe? ( Or, state by state perhaps? ).
If I drive to Monticello, New York in 10 years, will I be passing a sign that says, " Welcome To The Onondaga Nation" ?.. and what does that say for the sovereignty of Monticello, New York?
Closest analogy is that each Tribe is a little State, or more like a Territory. Federal laws generally apply. Most State laws do not (some treaties accept some States juristiction, in some cases). The term “semi-autonomous” is close, but not quite.
Um, if you really want to understand this issue, read the books I mentioned in my previous post (#10). You can get updates from some NDN sites (Google is your Friend), but they won’t mean much if you don’t have a basic understanding of the history. I’m sorry if this means a lot of reading you don’t really want to do; I recognize it’s work because the reading is pretty dry. However, there are several hundred nations, or fragments/remnants of same, each of which has a different set of problems and/or treaty issues. There is no possible way that anyone can give you a succinct, one paragraph explanation for even one nation.
Given your disregard of my previous post, I’m not sure why I’m bothering … maybe it will at least benefit others who read the thread, who want to know badly enough to do the reading, given some pointers.
For those who live in NY, or who might be interested in visiting, here’s the link for the Iroquois Indian Museum, which is located in Howes Cave, New York, not far from Albany. There is a site for the Iroquois people as a whole, which offers links for the individual nations. However, the amount of information thus available is focused on cultural stuff. I think the graphic illustration of the correct (male) headdress for each of the Haudenosaunee nations is neat! And is a laudable attempt to replace the unfortunate notion of white society that all NDNs wore eagle bonnets. :rolleyes:
A site which offers lots of information on a wide variety of NDN Nations and issues is Dick Shovel. However, I caution potential visitors that this site is aggressively pro-NDN. Jordan’s site is not the place to go if you are not of Native American descent, and are offended by the idea that white culture has not treated the original inhabitants of this continent (and their descendants) well. IMO, the best introduction to his thoughts/opinions is at President Clinton’s “One America Initiative”
The Mohawk Nation (and other Iroquoian Nations in the northeast {original members of this group were Seneca, Onondaga, Mohawk, Oneida and Cayuga}) is among the most active in pursuing the treaty rights which are theirs on paper, but which have not been enforced. AAMOF, the Mohawk continue to contest treaty rights much more vigorously with the Canadian government than with the U.S., for the last 30 years or so.
WRT the New York state land issues about which you appear to be concerned, I would expect, if the courts continue along present lines, that there will be some changes in land use/ownership, although the courts are certainly far from allowing them to have everything the treaties assert are theirs. The courts have also c/h/e/a/t/i/n/g/ offered the various Nations with land claims in New York state much less money on land they chose to alienate from treaty rights (rather than return) than the land is worth (The government offers range mostly from a penny to a dime on the dollar {often even that is based on values at a date more than a hundred years ago, not current land use or values}; the courts are mostly assigning prices in the twenty to forty cent range {based on values as of the same dates as the government}, which the government has already appealed in at least one case).
Although I am not on tribal rolls, thanks to the Dawes Act, I have considerably more than the minimum “blood quantum” (Cherokee), and I try to keep abreast of what’s going on WRT “Indian Rights”.
<hijack>
For all you who are speaking up “on behalf” of Native Rights, I assume you’ve sent at least one letter this year on behalf of Leonard Peltier?
</hijack>
I’m sorry if I sound a bit irritable, but I tried very hard to provide actual information, in the best Dopester tradition. I find it rather frustrating to have my efforts ignored, while the OP continues to ask questions I’ve already tried hard to answer. The only other thing to offer is legal information. I shall be very interested to learn if the OP actually reads any of this; it’s too dry and boring. Titles are the ones given by the sites.
It’s my best guess that this will continue in litigation for at least another decade. Then there will be another decade while what lands the courts do give back are vacated. And from the point when the Senecas receive payment for the lands which the court does not give them, the Seneca Nation will be pursuing purchase of whatever they can.
However, where some more substantial legal transgression is involved, none of the “Indian” nations has the desire to discipline non-members (nor are they that stupid, to stir up hatred in the white people, most of whom still consider themselves superior to “Indians”, unless the person has transgressed against something they consider sacred); they merely wish to be able to punish their own people according to their own rules.
Titles are the ones given by the sites.