Historical
See other Historical Articles
Title: 'This is 21st Century racism and apartheid': Cherokee Indian tribe expels all slave descendants
Source:
Daily Mail Online
URL Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art ... pelling-slave-descendants.html
Published: Aug 27, 2011
Author: Paul Bently
Post Date: 2011-08-27 18:30:25 by Sebastian
Keywords: None
Views: 17617
Comments: 24
The nation's second-largest Indian tribe formally booted from membership thousands of descendants of black slaves who were brought to Oklahoma more than 170 years ago by Native American owners. The Cherokee nation voted after the Civil War to admit the slave descendants to the tribe. But on Monday, the tribe's Supreme Court ruled that a 2007 tribal decision to kick the so-called 'Freedmen' out of the tribe could be upheld. Scroll down for video Heritage: The case centred on whether the descendants of black slaves taken in by Native American owners should be deemed official members The controversy stems from a footnote in the brutal history of U.S. treatment of Native Americans. When many Indians were forced to move to what later became Oklahoma from the eastern U.S. in 1838, some who had owned plantations in the South brought along their slaves. Some 4,000 Indians died during the forced march, which became known as the Trail of Tears. Verdict: Members of the tribe site in court to hear the outcome of the case 'And our ancestors carried the baggage,' said Marilyn Vann, the Freedman leader who is a plaintiff in the legal battle. In the winter of 1838, U.S. soldiers rounded up Cherokees and led them on a thousand mile march from their homelands in Tennessee to Indian Territory in Oklahoma. The brutal programme of forced removal, implemented so their land could be annexed, would later be referred to as the Trail of Tears. It is believed that about 4,000 of the tribe died on the journey, which many took completely barefoot. Handed blankets for the trip from a hospital where a smallpox epidemic had broken out, the Cherokees were not allowed into any towns along the way for fear they would spread infection. At one point they were massively overcharged to cross a river and were forced to wait while other travellers took precedence. Many Cherokees died huddled in the cold waiting to cross. Officially, there are about 2,800 Freedmen, but another 3,500 have tribal membership applications pending, and there could be as many as 25,000 eligible to enter the tribe, according to Vann. The tribal court decision was announced one day before absentee ballots were to be mailed in the election of the Cherokee Principal Chief. 'This is racism and apartheid in the 21st Century,' said Mrs Vann, an engineer who lives in Oklahoma City. Tribal member Kenneth Payton told NewsOn6: 'It's my legal right [to be in the tribe]. It's my humane right. This is more of a human rights issue than anything else.' Member David Adams, however, said: 'A person ought to have at least one member of family to be tribal.' Spokesmen for the tribe did not respond when asked to comment. The move to exclude the Freedmen has rankled some African American members of Congress, which has jurisdiction over all Native American tribes in the country. Support: Many tribal members back the decision, despite accusations of racism Furious: The decision has been labelled a serious human rights abuse by critics A lawsuit challenging the Freedman's removal from the tribe has been pending in federal court in Washington, for about six years. As a sovereign nation, Cherokee Nation officials maintain that the tribe has the right to amend its constitutional membership requirements. Removal from the membership rolls means the Freedmen will no longer be eligible for free health care and other benefits such as education concessions.
THE TRAIL OF TEARS
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
#1. To: Sebastian (#0)
The Cherokee Nation Supreme Court found that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction and DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. The Cherokee Nation amended their constitution in 2007. The Court has no choice but to follow it. The Judicial Appeals Tribunal of the Cherokee Nation was renamed and is now the Supreme Court of the Cherokee Nation. The JAT was, and the Supreme Court is, the highest court of the Cherokee Nation, just with a different name. In 2006, the Freeman descendant citizenship issue was decided by the Court in favor of the Freedman descendants. The Cherokee statute 11 C.N.C.A § 12 ("Tribal membership is derived only through proof of Cherokee blood based on the Final Rolls" referring to Dawes Commission rolls dating to shortly after the Civil War) was declared unconstitutional under the 1975 Cherokee Constitution. However, the Court specifically stated, "citizenship is an internal matter for the Cherokee citizenry to ultimately decide." On March 3, 2007 the Cherokee amended its constitution. The 2011 Opinion of the Court at 6 states: At 11, the Certificate of Mailing states, "REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTRUCTION TO DISMISS FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION. In the Concurring Opinion of the Justice Haskins it states: Failure to properly and timely raise these issues denied this Court the opportunity to timely address these weighty issues and detennine whether it should enjoin the vote whkh gave rise to the Constitutional Amendment of March 3, 2007. The March 3, 2007, special election was held in compliance with Cherokee law, and included voting members of the Freedmen. An overwhelming majority of the citizens of the Cherokee Nation voted to support the Constitutional Amendment. Once the Cherokee Nation Constitution was amended by a popular vote of the people on March 3, 2007, it then became woven into the legal fabric of the Cherokee people - by which this Court must abide. This Court [The Supreme Court of the Cherokee Nation], is a constitutionally created court. Each Justice has individually taken an oath to defend our Constitution - as a Whole. Regardless of how this Court 's majority Opinion may be scrutinized and dissected, the issue at bar was not about race. The Court's majority Opinion neither supports nor rejects the Freedmen's citizenship with the Cherokee Nation. We find only that the Cherokee Courts lack subject matter jurisdiction to now resolve the Freedmen challenge. Whether the March 3, 2007, Cherokee Nation vote of self-detennination of its citizenry violates the Treaty of 1866 between the Cherokee Nation and the United States of American is now an issue for the two governments to resolve. I would also like to point out that the United States of America never sought to intervene in these proceedings. - - - CHEROKEE Freedman Decision 03-07-2006, Judicial Appeals Tribunal of the Cherokee Nation - - - Cherokee Nation Registrar v Nash et al, Supreme Court of Cherokee Nation, SC-2011-02, 22aug2011 - - -
Refreshingly simple.
I am thinking it is their right to do, however, it is not a kind or benevolent move. Some things are worth fighting for and some aren't. I am not thinking this should be a hill to die upon.
What else is new?
There are no replies to Comment # 4. End Trace Mode for Comment # 4.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestFurious: The decision has been labelled a serious human rights abuse by critics
Notwithstanding any provisions of the Cherokee Nation Constitution approved on October 2, 1975, and the Cherokee Nation Constitution ratified by the people on July 26, 2003, upon passage of this Amendment, citizens of the Cherokee Nation shall be only those originally enrolled on, or descendants of those enrolled on, the Final Rolls of the Cherokee Nation, commonly referred to as the Dawes Rolls, for those listed as Cherokees by Blood, Delaware Cherokees pursuant to Article II of the Delaware Agreement dated the 8th day of May, 1867, and the Shawnee Cherokees pursuant to Article III of the Shawnee Agreement dated the 9th day of June, 1869.
There is no subject matter jurisdiction for the Cherokee Nation District Court, or this Court, to determine that the March 3, 2007, Amendment to the Cherokee Nation Constitution is unconstitutional. And, subject matter jurisdiction cannot be waived.
I respectfully suggest that the Freedmen should have timely raised their Constitutional and Treaty violation claims before passage of the Constitutional Amendment of March 3, 2007; however, they failed to do so. The Freedmen's fa ilure to timely raise the issues at bar, until after March 3, 2007, has divested this Court and the lower court of subject matter jurisdiction.
#2. To: nolu chan (#1)
The Cherokee Nation amended their constitution in 2007. The Court has no choice but to follow it.
#3. To: Sebastian (#2)
#4. To: diva betsy ross (#3)
(Edited)
I am not thinking...
Replies to Comment # 4.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]