# The Sioux nation has said president Trump does not have permission to visit Mt. Rushmore. Can they do that?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [July 2, 2020, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017 "2020-07-02T03:37:29Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/1 "2020-07-02T03:37:29Z")
I was reading the following:
> Trump’s visit to the huge site that commemorates four US presidents was a violation of the historic treaties that the US government had signed with Native Americans that were meant to govern the sacred Black Hills, the Oglala tribal president said, adding that Trump should have asked permission for the trip from the seven Sioux tribal governments.
>
> “The lands on which that mountain is carved and the lands he’s about to visit belong to the Great Sioux nation under a treaty signed in 1851 and the[Fort Laramie Treaty of 1868](https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/sioux-treaty#:~:text=The%20Black%20Hills%20of%20Dakota,use%20by%20the%20Sioux%20people.) and I have to tell him he doesn’t have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time,” Bear Runner said.
>
> The 1868 treaty acknowledged Sioux sovereignty over the Black Hills in perpetuity but after gold was discovered in the area the federal government forced the Sioux to relinquish this part of their reservation. [In 1980, the US supreme court ruled](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Sioux_Nation_of_Indians) that tribal lands covered by the treaty had been taken from the Sioux illegally.
SOURCE: [Donald Trump should stay away from Mount Rushmore, Sioux leader says](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/jul/01/mount-rushmore-donald-trump-sioux)
So, can the Sioux nation deny the US president entry to Mt. Rushmore as a legal matter?
---
### Author:  [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/2 "2020-07-02T03:39:06Z")
I’m pretty sure trump has more guns than they have…
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/3 "2020-07-02T03:40:50Z")
No. It’s a National Memorial. If they actually controlled the land would Mt Rushmore even exist?
What are they going to do? Sioux him?
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/4 "2020-07-02T03:41:36Z")
By that argument the US president can go anywhere that does not have an army big enough to stop him/her.
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/5 "2020-07-02T03:43:10Z")
The federal government owns the land. The Sioux can perhaps sue for damages but as far as I know they can’t reclaim the land.
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/6 "2020-07-02T03:45:22Z")
Did you read the quote in the OP?
The Sioux were given the land by treaty, the US ignored the treaty till the Supreme Court said, in 1980, that the land properly belonged to the Sioux per the treaty. By that point the monument existed.
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/7 "2020-07-02T03:51:22Z")
It’s a National Memorial run by the Park Service. If the Sioux actually owned the land they wouldn’t have to call for it to be destroyed. They could just do it.
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/8 "2020-07-02T03:56:20Z")
The SCOTUS ordered the US to pay compensation for the land. The US offered a cash settlement that was rejected by the Oglala Sioux. They are demanding return of the land.
> **[Could the U.S. give up Mount Rushmore? Iconic site is on list of 'sacred...](https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2140134/Mount-Rushmore-list-sacred-land-UN-says-returned-Native-Americans.html)**
>
> UN human rights expert James Anaya has recommended that the US return sacred lands seized from Native Americans, including the site of Mount Rushmore.
Yes I know it’s the Daily Mail.
n 1980, the Supreme Court ruled that the land was seized illegally and ordered the government to pay compensation. The Sioux, however, rejected the money, calling for the return of the now public lands.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/9 "2020-07-02T04:00:25Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> The Sioux were given the land by treaty, the US ignored the treaty till the Supreme Court said, in 1980, that the land properly belonged to the Sioux per the treaty. By that point the monument existed.
I don’t feel that’s the right interpretation of what the Supreme Court ruled. The Court didn’t overturn the treaty and return ownership of the disputed territory to the Sioux. What they ruled was that Congress had not paid fair compensation to the Sioux for the territory and directed Congress to make that payment.
The Sioux have refused to accept the payment and argue that because they have not accepted payment, they retain ownership. But I don’t think that’s a valid legal argument. The government has the power of eminent domain, which means it can take property even if the owners don’t want to sell. Refusing to accept the offered payment does not negate the taking of the property.
ETA: ninja’d by madsircool
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/10 "2020-07-02T04:07:01Z")
Don’t you have to go to court to take land via eminent domain? Was that done here?
And since when is refusing an offer mean you lose control of your property? If the US government sent someone to your door, handed you $10 and told you to get out have you lost control of your property because an offer was made so it does not matter if you refuse that offer?
It was their land by treaty. The US took it improperly. The US Constitution says:
> This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/11 "2020-07-02T04:10:08Z")
The SCOTUS ruled that the government took the land illegally and had to compensate the Souix. It didnt order the government to return the land itself.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/12 "2020-07-02T04:11:07Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> Don’t you have to go to court to take land via eminent domain?
Not if I’m Congress.
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/13 "2020-07-02T04:14:44Z")
So if congress passes something that says they get **Little\_Nemo’s** house for $10 that’s the end of it for you? Take the $10 and hit the street?
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/14 "2020-07-02T04:16:41Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> If the US government sent someone to your door, handed you $10 and told you to get out have you lost control of your property because an offer was made so it does not matter if you refuse that offer?
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> So if congress passes something that says they get **Little\_Nemo’s** house for $10 that’s the end of it for you? Take the $10 and hit the street?
Congress is required to pay you fair compensation. You would almost certainly win a court case arguing that ten dollars is not the value of your property. But that just means you would get a better offer. It does not mean you would get your property back.
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/15 "2020-07-02T04:19:22Z")
So congress or a court needs to take via eminent domain. Has either done so yet regarding this case?
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/16 "2020-07-02T04:31:34Z")
The Sioux Nation was a foreign entity. US law didnt apply to them. Only the terms of the treaty mattered. I’m not sure that ED would even apply to any NA land today because they are separate political entities created by treaty.
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/17 "2020-07-02T04:34:42Z")
So then, by treaty it is their land. Treaties are the supreme law of the land.
But the US and its courts have just chosen to ignore that.
---
### Author:  [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/18 "2020-07-02T04:37:10Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> So congress or a court needs to take via eminent domain. Has either done so yet regarding this case?
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#):
>
> So then, by treaty it is their land. Treaties are the supreme law of the land.
>
> But the US and its courts have just chosen to ignore that.
This case was reviewed by the Supreme Court. I’m going to assume they know what the law is.
---
### Author:  [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/19 "2020-07-02T04:38:12Z")
But the courts didnt. The US was ordered to pay a cash equivalent. Lots of that land had become cities and were in private hands. Giving back the land would have caused lots of dislocation. There are similar issues in Maine.
---
### Author:  [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)
#### Post date: [July 2, 2020, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017/20 "2020-07-02T04:43:00Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#):
>
> I’m going to assume they know what the law is.
Sure…cuz the Supreme Court has never, ever gotten the law wrong. 🙄
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-sioux-nation-has-said-president-trump-does-not-have-permission-to-visit-mt-rushmore-can-they-do-that/914017.md?page=2)