Remember this: Does it apply, or does it not? If it doesn't, can someone find a proper home for it in the future in some legal jargon? Or is it somewhere else?
One must muddle through the swamp of legal wording. Hey, I got nothing to do but read.
One must muddle through the swamp of legal wording. Hey, I got nothing to do but read.
Section 5 and Section 6 needs
to creep up from the grave. This should apply to the Governor of North Dakota, Morton County Sheriff's Department, public and private entities exercising aggressive measures towards the Standing Rock Sioux Peace Prayer against DAPL, and anyone else pretending to be concerned, while assaulting tribal members with war tactics, bodily harm, and crimes against people living under the supposed protection of the US Federal Trust of Indigenous lands.
An Act to Regulate Trade and Intercourse With the Indian Tribes
(1790).
SEC. 5.
And be it further enacted, That if any citizen or inhabitant of the United
States, or of either of the territorial districts of the United States, shall
go into any town, settlement or territory belonging to any nation or tribe of
Indians, and shall there commit any crime upon, or trespass against, the person
or property of any peaceable and friendly Indian or Indians, which, if
committed within the jurisdiction of any state, or within the jurisdiction of
either of the said districts, against a citizen or white inhabitant thereof,
would be punishable by the laws of such state or district, such offender or
offenders shall be subject to the same punishment, and shall be proceeded
against in the same manner as if the offence had been committed within the
jurisdiction of the state or district to which he or they may belong, against a
citizen or white inhabitant thereof.
SEC. 6.
And be it further enacted, That for any of the crimes or offences aforesaid,
the like proceedings shall be had for apprehending, imprisoning or bailing the
offender, as the case may be, and for recognizing the witnesses for their
appearance to testify in the case, and where the offender shall be committed,
or the witnesses shall be in a district other than that in which the offence is
to be tried, for the removal of the offender and the witnesses or either of
them, as the case may be, to the district in which the trial is to be had, as
by the act to establish the judicial courts of the United States, are directed
for any crimes or offenses against the United States.
Seems pretty square on how it applies.
Another
thing, as I have been reading, is:
If the Standing Rock Agency at Ft. Yates,
North Dakota, is the field office for the Bureau of Indian Affairs that
provides Trust Services and tribal services to the Standing Rock Sioux-what
exactly was the Bureau of Indian Affairs doing to ensure they were policing the
Trust Responsibilities towards the Standing Rock Sioux in regard to the
aggressive means used by the Governor of North Dakota, Morton County Sheriff’s
Department, and anyone else employed through private, or public entities.
I know I have seen the complaint the Bureau of Indians Affairs does not do its job, so exactly what were they doing in all this? I have seen others voicing their concerns on this.
If this has been a long standing complaint within the indigenous tribes, why hasn't that office been overhauled to bring it current where tribal constituents are better served in a timely manner. When you have enough complaints that the Bureau of Indian Affairs is slacking on the job, that would call for an over-all assessment of functioning, revision, and overhaul.
If it is not working-repair it.
If this has been a long standing complaint within the indigenous tribes, why hasn't that office been overhauled to bring it current where tribal constituents are better served in a timely manner. When you have enough complaints that the Bureau of Indian Affairs is slacking on the job, that would call for an over-all assessment of functioning, revision, and overhaul.
If it is not working-repair it.
Is someone is going to treat indigenous people as charges of the federal government, then who were the irresponsible adults in these shenanigans? Nowhere did I read or see...Bureau of Indian Affairs said or did (blank). There is
nothing to read on that unless it is hid in the dark net. As you read further you will see, I assume but could be wrong, that more responsibility has been given to the Bureau of Indian Affairs to manage trust fund lands on behalf of the tribes.
I did find
this on the Mille Lacs band Of Ojibwe that probably needs a couple of eyes cast
upon it-for learning sake.
For your reading enjoyment:
For your reading enjoyment:
The U.S. Government Trust Responsibility to American Indians
·
The U.S.government has a
trust responsibility to American Indians. This trust responsibility was an
underlying promise made by the United States when it made treaties and
agreements with Indian tribes.
·
The U.S. government
acquired virtually all of its land through treaties or agreements with Indian
tribes. Today most lands that Indian tribes use are owned by the United
States and held in trust by the U.S. government for those tribes.
·
The U.S. government made
a commitment to protect Indian tribes from non-Indians by enacting the Trade
and Intercourse Acts, which were passed between 1790 and
1834. Exploitation of Indians was one of the major reasons for conflict
between Indians and non-Indians.
·
The U.S. government’s
trust responsibility to American Indians was affirmed in the 1830s by the
Supreme Court. The court ruled that when the government entered into
treaties with Indian tribes, it made a promise to protect and enhance Indian
tribes.
·
In 1871, the United
States passed legislation stating that it would no longer enter into treaties
with Indian tribes, primarily because it had acquired all the land that it
wanted at the time and because the treaty-making process had caused conflicts
between the Senate and the House of Representatives. Thereafter, all federal
laws passed with regard to tribes have been the result of actions taken by
Congress.
·
The U.S. government
assumes a trust responsibility for all lands that it owns, whether they are
national parks, national forests, military reserves, or Indian trust
lands. The government’s responsibility is to manage those lands in a way
that best serves the people who use them.
·
The U.S. government’s
responsibility for managing land held in trust for Indian tribes is no
different from its duty for managing other lands it owns. The United
States is responsible for ensuring that decisions that affect Indian trust
lands benefit the tribes involved.
·
In recent years, the
United States has said that every federal agency has an obligation to ensure
the protection of tribal governments, even though the trust relationship is
administered primarily through the Bureau of Indian Affairs. For example,
the Department of Energy has a responsibility to ensure that the energy needs
of tribes are being met, and the Environmental Protection Agency has a
responsibility to ensure that the environments within Indian reservations are
protected.
·
Federal agencies and
their employees are responsible for ensuring that their actions that affect
Indian tribes enhance, protect and improve conditions for the tribal
communities and governments. Each federal agency has applicable law that
describes its relationship to everyone in the United States, including its
trust relationship with Indian tribes.
·
Management programs for
Indian trust lands are implemented for the most part by the Department of the
Interior, which has regulations describing how it will protect and enhance
federal lands. Generally, protection and enhancement of Indian trust lands are
done through the Interior Department’s Bureau of Indian Affairs, and recently,
more tribes are assuming control over the use of their own lands through
self-governance cooperative agreements.
·
In the 1980s, tribes
began to take on some of the responsibilities for managing trust lands under
the authority of a federal law, P.L. 93-638, also known as self-governance. Under
self-governance, tribes have received federal funds directly to administer and
manage programs, services, functions and activities that the tribe determines
are in the best interest of its members.
·
Self-governance does not
mean that the trustee-benefactor relationship between the United States and
tribes ceases. Instead it means that the U.S. government now has cooperative
agreements with tribes that enable them to directly operate programs for their
members that formerly were provided by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the
Indian Health Service. A major tenet of self-governance laws is the
continued trust responsibility of the federal government to tribes.
