Cherokee Freedmen

Commentary: Cherokee Nation SCT Quashes Injunction Issued by Federal Court in Cherokee Freedmen Case

Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is a link to the Cherokee court order, via Indianz, and a news article from an informer reader on the issue.

The real question becomes, then, will the vote tally seeming to favor Bill John Baker be sufficient to make irrelevant the votes of the descendants of the Cherokee Freedmen, hopefully mooting this inter-judicial showdown.

I have advocated that tribal courts, in narrow circumstances, should resist federal court orders where the federal court appears to have no other source of jurisdiction but for pure federal common law, such as National Farmers Union. I was thinking, and continue to think, that certain questions of tribal court authority should not concern federal interests — subject areas like tort claims by tribal members against nonmembers who have burned down the entire reservation or tortiously damaged tribal government property and vital materials. But I’d hate to see tribal sovereignty go to the wall to defend the decision of one tribe to clumsily racialize its membership criteria. [I say clumsy because the Dawes rolls are so obviously flawed as to make membership decisions involving the Freedmen with them is negligent at best, and racist at worst.]

The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court could have done what the U.S. Supreme Court has done in circumstances involving international law — defer to the policymaking branches and invoke a form of the political question doctrine. The Court could have simply sat on the case until the dust settled. In fact, it appears both the Nation and the Freedmen descendants asked them to do so. Cherokee already lost millions in HUD money. The tribal court isn’t doing much to alleviate this dispute, and appears to be inflaming it even more.

Bill John Baker Leads Chad Smith (61-39%) with Half of Votes Counted

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the article from WaPo, via Pechanga.

Absentee votes, which account for approximately half of the voting, remain to be counted.

Federal Court Dismisses Vann v. Salazar; Cherokee Nation v. Nash Remains

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the WaPo coverage, and the materials:

DCT Order Dismissing Vann Complaint

Federal Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss

Smith Motion to Dismiss

Vann Motion to Amend Complaint

Vann Motion to Consolidate

Update in Vann v. Salazar — With Materials on Cherokee Principal Chief Election

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are additional materials:

Vann Reply

Vann Supplemental Brief

Joint Motion for Order

Interview with Tiya Miles on NPR’s Tell Me More

Kate Fort

Prof. Miles was yesterday interviewed about the history of the Cherokee Nation and Freedmen here.

MILES: Well, I think that those legacies remain with us. And I think that in the case of the Cherokee Nation and other native nations, there’s a felt conflict between the sovereignty of those nations and the question of what the role should be, what the place should be of minorities in those nations.

So, whereas the United States can and has at times protected the status of minorities and not felt itself threatened by Canada, for instance, about what it does. Native nations definitely feel themselves threatened by the United States government. They are concerned that their sovereignty, the right to make decisions for themselves, is going to be undermined by the U.S. government as it has been so many times in the past.

But what I feel is a real problem here is that the Cherokee Nation is taking its definition from what really has been a white supremacist U.S. nation that fought to – I’m sorry. Go ahead, Michel.

She also recounts what she was doing when she found out she won a MacArthur Genius Grant:

MARTIN: So before we let you go, we always have to ask. Where were you and what were you doing when you got the call? For people who are unaware of the MacArthur so-called Genius Grants are not things you can apply for. You have to be nominated. People generally don’t find out that they’ve won until they get the call. So, what were you doing when you got the call?

MILES: I was at home cleaning the kitchen when I got the call. And this was something that was so completely out of the blue and so completely overwhelming that I actually had to just sit down. I was on the staircase in our house. I had to sit on the steps just to kind of get my bearings and to let this sink in.

MARTIN: Any idea what you’ll do with the grant?

MILES: Well, I’ve never actually contemplated so much money, but I do have a couple of ideas. One thing that I’m really excited about is continuing my research and taking it into other areas within the U.S. and Native American history. So, I’ve worked so far on the South and Indian territory. But now, I want to really look at slavery in the north and in particular in Detroit and in Michigan, because this is a place where we also don’t really think about slavery existing, but it did. And the slaves in Detroit and in Michigan and Ontario were African-American and also Native American.

MARTIN: Well, I hope you’ll get a nice bottle of wine, too, in there, maybe.

MILES: Maybe. Maybe I’ll do that.

 

NPR Coverage of Cherokee Freedmen Controversy

Adrea Korthase2 Comments

The story (and audio) can be found here. An excerpt:

The Cherokee Nation has expelled about 2,800 African Americans who are descendants of slaves once owned by wealthy Cherokee. They are known as Freedmen, and for long periods in the past, these Freedmen enjoyed equal rights in the Cherokee tribe. But in more recent history, their citizenship rights have been challenged repeatedly.

The Cherokee’s most recent decision strips about 2,800 African Americans of benefits afforded to tribal citizens, including medical care, food stipends and assistance for low-income homeowners. It also prompted dozens of descendants who are known as “Freedmen” to protest.

NYTs “Room for Debate” — Tribal Rights vs. Racial Justice (Cherokee Freedmen Expulsion)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

The New York Times’ “Room for Debate” series has published a series of articles on the Cherokee Freedmen controversy.

Debaters

Cherokee Nation AG Concurs with Freedmen Motion for Reconsideration before the Cherokee SCT

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Hat tip Pechanga.

Here are those materials:

SC-11-02 16Motion to Reconsider Order of August 22 2011 9-13-11

SC-11-02 17-Response 9-14-11

The Cherokee AG’s response is curious: The AG agrees that the case should be reconsidered, largely in light of HUD’s decision to cut off funding and the BIA’s warning letter.

Here are the District Court stays in question:

11-Temp Order and Temp Injunction 5-14-2007

Order Continuing Current TO & Temp Injunction Pending Appeal

Will the Cherokee Supreme Court grant the motion????

Cherokee Nation Election Commission Allows Freedmen to Vote Provisionally

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

From WaPo:

The Cherokee Nation’s election commission voted Wednesday to allow descendants of slaves once owned by tribal members to cast ballots for principal chief, but they’ll only count in the event of a court order.

Federal officials objected to a ruling last month by the tribe’s highest court that found only people of direct Cherokee ancestry could be members of the tribe and vote in the upcoming election, essentially denying ballots to some 2,800 freedmen descendants.

While the election commission’s vote doesn’t directly overturn the ruling by the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court, it does allow for freedmen to cast provisional ballots in an effort to make the election results stand, regardless of how the courts ultimately rule.

“If a court decides the freedmen descendants can vote we will have the ability to certify the election,” Election Commission chairwoman Susan Plumb said. “If the court decides they cannot vote, we will still be able to preserve the election.”

MSNBC Coverage of Cherokee Freedmen Controversy

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

An excerpt:

“The Cherokee Nation will not be governed by the BIA,” Joe Crittenden, the tribe’s acting principal chief, said in a statement responding to the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Crittenden, who leads the tribe until a new principal chief is elected, went on to complain about unnamed congressmen meddling in the tribe’s self-governance.

The reaction follows a letter the tribe received on Monday from BIA Assistant Secretary Larry Echo Hawk, who warned that the results of the September 24 Cherokee election for principal chief will not be recognized by the U.S. government if the ousted members, known to some as “Cherokee Freedmen,” are not allowed to vote.