treaty rights – Page 11

On Indian History and Blankets

July 11, 2013July 11, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Interesting article on blankets and American history, homophobia, and Indian history. An excerpt:

In his 2001 installation “Deep Down, I Don’t Believe in Hymns” conceptual artist Dario Robleto turns a blanket back on itself. He infests a military-issued blanket from 1862 with vinyl record dust, specifically the particles of two songs: Neil Young and Crazy Horse’s “Cortez the Killer,” and Soft Cell’s “Tainted Love” (which was originally recorded and performed by Gloria Jones in 1965 — Soft Cell, a UK band, covered it in 1981). Neil Young and Crazy Horse’s “Cortez the Killer” imagines the colonizer with galleons and guns, “dancing across the water” looking for the new world, while Montezuma basks on shore, surrounded by abundance: cocoa leaves, pearls, gold, beautiful women, strong men, and secrets. While the title itself critiques discovery (so-called) and conquest, Neil Young and Crazy Horse cannot resist falling back on the very colonial tropes they wish to send up. In the song “Cortez [was] the killer” — but there are also the beautiful Natives, and a beautiful Native woman, specifically, “who still loves me to this day.” The song is infected with tainted love.

This military-issued blanket is likely from the U.S.-Dakota War of 1862, an intense six weeks of Dakota resistance against settler encroachment and the U.S. nation’s broken treaties. At the end of those six weeks, a military commission tried nearly 400 Dakota men accused of participating in the war. 303 of those were sentenced to death and 16 were given prison terms. President Lincoln (who was deeply embroiled in the Civil War) reviewed the trial transcripts and “anxious to not act with so much clemency as to encourage another outbreak on one hand, nor with so much severity as to be real cruelty on the other” he decided to execute those who had “been proved guilty of violating females.” But since only two men were found guilty of rape, he expanded his charge to include those who had participated in “massacres.” On December 26, 1862, 38 Dakota men were hanged in present-day Mankato, Minnesota — this remains the largest government-sanctioned execution in U.S. history.

Throughout the 1860s and 1870s, the Dakota people were removed to reservations where many of them starved because of scarce game, drought, and unsuitable soil. Others died of disease or exposure because, despite its promises, the U.S. government failed to supply clothing — and blankets. Blankets were a matter of life and death on the Plains. The blanket meant survival, but also communicated a sense of dependency on the U.S. People died without blankets. And then blankets retroactively covered the dead.

Yakama Settles Federal Suit with Counties and Out-of-State Jurisdictions over Unauthorized Raid on Tribal Lands

June 21, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the press release:

YAKAMA-COUNTIES SETTLEMENT PRESS RELEASE

News coverage, where county attorney says “we’re sorry.”

Text from the Yakama press release:

The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation have reached out-of-court settlements with Yakima County, Benton County, and local governments from Virginia and Mississippi, to resolve the Nation’s lawsuit against those governments for a February 16, 2011, dawn raid of Yakama Reservation trust lands. Upon the first of two joint dismissal requests filed with the U.S. District Court, Judge Rosanna Peterson has already dismissed most of the claims between the parties.

“We are pleased and proud that governments from here in the Yakima Valley and Columbia River Basin, to as far away as the east coast, have all agreed to honor the Yakama Treaty of 1855,” said Yakama Nation Tribal Council Chairman Harry Smiskin. “Each of them will seek our blessing before every again returning to Yakama lands. They will also cooperate with our Tribal Police, Tribal Jail and Tribal Court to improve public safety on our reservation.”

Through Article II of the Yakama Treaty of 1855, the Yakama Reservation was set apart for the exclusive use and benefit of the Yakama Nation. To that end, the Yakama Treaty makes clear that no “white man” shall be permitted to reside upon Yakama Indian Country without permission from the Yakama Nation. The federal Treaty negotiators explained to the Yakama that Article II meant that no one would be permitted to step onto Yakama Reservation lands without the Yakamas’ consent.

In Article VIII of the Yakama Treaty, the United States and Yakama Nation set forth a process for delivering Yakama criminals or suspects who are in Yakama Indian Country to federal authorities. Federal Treaty negotiators explained to the Yakama that Article VIII meant there would be a consultation process between the Head Chief or all of the Yakama Chiefs, and the United States relative to any Yakama alleged to have committed a wrong, before they might be delivered up to federal authorities.

In March 2011, the Yakama Nation sued federal law enforcement agencies and several local governments for violating these federal Treaty provisions when raiding a Yakama member-owned business on Yakama trust lands without providing any advance notice to Yakama authorities, and in turn barring Yakama Nation cops who arrived at the scene of the raid to help keep the peace.

Since the spring of 2012, all of the parties to the litigation have engaged in a multi-track mediation process. The Yakama Nation and Department of Justice defendants remain in settlement negotiations.

Suit materials are here, here, here, and here.

Update in KBIC Member Suit against Michigan over Pig Farming

May 31, 2013May 31, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is the first amended complaint in Turunen v. Creagh (W.D. Mich.):

Turunen First Amended Complaint

Michigan previously moved to dismiss here:

Michigan Motion to Dismiss

First post was here.

KBIC Member Sues Michigan DNR over State Regs Affecting Pig Farming

April 1, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here is the complaint in Turenen v. Michigan Dept. of Natural Resources (W.D. Mich.):

Turunen Complaint

An excerpt:

Plaintiff is a family farmer and a member of the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community (KBIC) residing and farming in the Western Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Plaintiff has been raising crops and livestock for the past 23 years on land located in the territory ceded to the United States of America via the 1842 Treaty between the United States and the Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, 7 Stat. 591 (the 1842 Treaty). Plaintiff’s farming operations are conducted pursuant to rights reserved in Article II of the 1842 Treaty and pursuant to a license from KBIC. Plaintiff’s treaty-protected farming activities are being threatened by the policies and activities of Defendants which seek to destroy a certain agri-industry in the State of Michigan, so-called hunting estates. To achieve this questionable goal Defendants have sought to prohibit Plaintiff’s pigs through an Invasive Species Order which literally can be applied to any pig in existence. Further, Defendants’ policies make no provision for Plaintiff’s treaty-protected farming activities and Defendants’ seek to impose their regulatory schemes upon Plaintiff. Plaintiff invokes this Court’s jurisdiction in order to protect her treaty reserved right to farm within the territory ceded to the United States by the 1842 Treaty.

Washington Supreme Court Decides Water Rights Case Involving Yakama Indian Nation

March 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Dept. of Ecology v. Acquavella:

Wash SCT Opinion

And the briefs are here:

Skokomish Tribe Files Treaty Hunting/Gathering Suit against State of Washington

February 25, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the complaint in Skokomish Indian Tribe v. Goldmark (W.D. Wash.):

1 – Complaint

An excerpt:

2. Plaintiff, Skokomish Indian Tribe, brings this action to protect the privilege of hunting and gathering roots and berries on open and unclaimed lands, guaranteed by Article 4 of the Treaty of Point No Point of January 26, 1855, (“Privilege”). 12 Stat. 933.
3. Plaintiff, Skokomish Indian Tribe’s territory as related to the Privilege of hunting and gathering includes:
a. All lands within the Twana territory; and
b. All lands within the ceded area boundaries established in Article 1 of the Treaty of Point No Point of January 26, 1855 (12 Stat. 933); and
c. All lands within the exterior boundaries of Plaintiff, Skokomish Indian Tribe’s Reservation; and
d. All lands within Plaintiff, Skokomish Indian Tribe’s traditional use areas; and
e. All other lands not within the exclusive hunting and gathering territories of other Indian tribes or bands recognized by the Secretary of the Interior.
(“Territory”).

Federal Court Rejects Yakama Treaty Defense to Federal Taxes on King Mountain Tobacco Products

February 18, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in King Mountain Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (E.D. Wash.):

DCT Order Denying Yakama Motion

Yakama Motion for Partial Summary J

Federal Opposition Memorandum

Yakama Reply

An excerpt:

This Court already has held that King Mountain does not enjoy an exemption from the federal excise tax on tobacco products under Capoeman because the tax is not imposed on products directly derived from the land. Therefore, to the degree that Article II contains express exemptive language, the exemption to taxation created by Article II would not apply to the facts of this case. Id. Accordingly, the Plaintiff has failed to establish an exemption to the excise tax under the Treaty.

The court also rejected claims that the General Allotment Act forbid the federal taxes as well:

In this case, Mr. Wheeler is the allottee, but King Mountain is the tax payer. The tax lien statute applies to the property of the “person liable to pay” the unpaid tax. 26 U.S.C. § 6321. Although the Court is aware that Mr. Wheeler’s assets could be subject to lien if King Mountain were found to be Mr. Wheeler’s alter ego, see G.M. Leasing Corp. v. United States, 429 U.S. 338, 350–51, 97 S.Ct. 619, 50 L.Ed.2d 530 (1977), the record is devoid of any evidence that King Mountain is Mr. Wheeler’s alter ego. Accordingly, any lien would be imposed on King Mountain’s property. As the trust property is held for the benefit of Mr. Wheeler, it is not an asset of King Mountain. Therefore, under the reasoning of Anderson, the Capoeman exception to taxation would not apply to income earned by King Mountain.

Materials in a related case are here.

“Faith in Paper,” First Spring Speakers Event on January 15th at 2pm

January 3, 2013January 15, 2013Kate Fort1 Comment

No registration necessary. We hope to see you here:

More on Fletcher Talk at Traverse City History Center: Legends of the Grand Traverse Region

September 21, 2012September 21, 2012Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Legend’s Grand Opening Announcement:

Don’t miss the exciting Grand Opening of “Legends of the Grand Traverse Region: Community out of Diversity.” This celebration is on Saturday, Sept. 22nd from 4:00pm to 6:30pm at the History Center of Traverse City. Attendees will tour the brand new Legends’ Exhibit, listen to the featured speaker, and then socialize at an elegant reception featuring adult beverages and tasty hors d’oeuvres. Admission is free, although good will offerings will be requested and are always appreciated!

The speaker is Matthew L.M. Fletcher, Professor of Law and Director of the Indigenous Law and Policy Center at Michigan State University College of Law, and member of the Grand Traverse Tribe of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians. He will be speaking on “The Story of the Grand Traverse Band’s Treaty Rights Fight.”

Professor Fletcher’s talk is designed to complement our fall 2012 Legend’s Exhibit. It highlights three of the “Legends” of the Traverse area: Art Duhamel of the Grand Traverse Band, well known for his stands regarding native fishing rights and federal recognition of the Grand Traverse Band; The Schaub family and their famous relative, Emelia Schaub, who was the first female prosecutor in Michigan; and Augusta Rosenthal-Thompson, who in 1884 arrived in northern Michigan as the first woman physician to practice in this area.

The Legends’ exhibit will be open through October 25th. That Thursday this fall’s Legends’ activities will close with an afternoon workshop and evening presentation by Dr. Elizabeth Faue, Professor of American History and the History of Women at Wayne State University. The afternoon workshop is on genealogy and “Lost Mothers.” The evening talk is entitled: “Barriers and Gateways: Women, Gender, and the Professions in the United States.”

Don’t miss this opening celebration of the Legends of the Grand Traverse Region. These fall 2012 Legends events are only an introduction to continuing Legends activities. Over the next several years we will celebrating more Legends: People and families from diverse backgrounds who came together to build the community we live in today. Our next three Legends will be celebrated starting in March of 2013, with more Legends being announced in Fall of 2013, Spring of 2014, and hopefully far into the future.

The History Center of Traverse City thanks the Michigan Humanities Council for its crucial support of the Legends’ project. We also thank our Legends’ partners: The Grand Traverse Genealogical Society, the Northwest Lower Michigan Women’s History Project, Congregation Beth El, the Hispanic Apostolate of the Diocese of Gaylord, the Traverse City Human Rights Commission, Professor Jim Press of Northwestern Michigan College’s History Department, and Cindy Patek of the Grand Traverse Tribe’s Eyaawing Museum and Cultural Center