As usual, Sam Deloria is ahead of the curve in thinking about broad issues of Indian law and policy.
From Sam Deloria:
[Are there] any plans to raise this [San Francisco Peaks and the Arizona Snowbowl] as the first situation in which the Obama administration can demonstrate its understanding of the UN declaration it just embraced?
[Is] anyone … taking a stab at formulating a way for the executive branch of USG to give principled accommodation to Indian religious concerns without running afoul of the Establishment Clause?
[I] think we need to write the formula ourselves instead of waiting for them to do it, and I think we need to understand their bewilderment and their need to understand the scope of any accommodation we ask for.
***
In general, I think at this point in most processes, we go limp and expect the government to do the hard work, which is to try to draw the line between ok and not-ok. And then we criticize them for not doing it, although we haven’t done much to help them. By dismissing their questions as being merely insensitivity, we forfeit the chance to influence the outcome.
Comments are welcome.
Turtle Talk 
The tenor and character of this inquiry by Sam Deloria is very important, and has been addressed, in part, by the complaint through the Navajo Nation Human Rights Commission on 10 November 2010 to Prof. Jim Anaya, UN Special Rapporteur for Indigenous Issues regarding the San Francisco Peaks case: http://www.nnhrc.navajo.org/pressReleases/2010/U.N.%20S.R.%20James%20Anaya%20Communication%20-%20Formal%20Complaint.pdf. One strategy in this complaint seems designed to force the Obama administration to account for its (and previous administrations’) actions regarding the Peaks specifically, and other Indian religious freedom usurpations, generally. A glimpse into the Obama administration’s stance on this particular issue may be found in the webcast of the town hall meeting, held November 5, 2010 in Geneva, on the occasion of the US testimony before the UN Human Rights Council for the Universal Periodic Review(UPR) of US compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR). When asked specifically about denial of Navajo religious freedom in the Peaks case, Harold Koh, Legal Advisor to the State Department rambled around, referring first to the 2006 Supreme Court opinion of Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita, and then about how political/legislative remedies are necessary precursors to strong implementation of treaty obligations, without ever addressing the question posed. You can view the town hall meeting at: https://statedept.connectsolutions.com/p43073855/. Koh’s comments on this point can be found at 1:52:00 into the video. In conclusion, if Prof. Anaya investigates the Navajo complaint, and finds the US to be in violation of the ICCPR, the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, and/or the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples(UNDRIP), Prof. Koh, and his cohorts at the State Department (and the State Department) would be forced to show the true colors of the US with respect to the UNDRIP. In following Prof. Deloria’s admonitions, strong support of the Navajo Human Rights Commission’s complaint to the UN Special Rapporteur seems to be in order.
Parenthetical in the second to last sentence should read: (and the White House).
Thanks, Mr. Morris (except for demoting me to professor). Dean Koh’s befuddlement is not surprising. These guys don’t have the occasion to think much about the issues we present, so they always overcompensate when put on the spot. the whole US position over the years has been very cautious, in part because they don’t know what we are talking about and the potential scope. it is our job to assuage their fears. if we don’t, they will always be too conservative.
Excellent suggestions by Sam and Glenn! It is always best in any negotiation to work from one’s own written position. This is especially important here, because we know what the other side wants to use as a starting point (as demonstrated by Koh’s comments). Further, the focus on SF Peaks is a powerful way to frame the deep conflict between US and indigenous perspectives by means of a clear and specific example. Good work!
My apologies, Dean.
man,you’re making it worse. how about “Sam”? easy to spell and say.