Civil Rights Laws

 

This is not a comprehensive list of Civil Rights Laws contained in the US Code. However these are some of the Civil Rights Laws that are violated most frequently and end yet so seldom enforced.

 

18 U.S. Code § 241. Conspiracy against rights

If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or

If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 103(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7018(a), (b)(1), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(a), title XXXII, §§ 320103(a), 320201(a), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 604(b)(14)(A), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)

 

18 U.S . Code § 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law



Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 696; Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 103(b), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 75; Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7019, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(b), title XXXII, §§ 320103(b), 320201(b), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1970, 2109, 2113, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 604(b)(14)(B), 607(a), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3511.)

 

 

18 U.S. Code § 245. Federally protected activities

 

(a)

(1)

Nothing in this section shall be construed as indicating an intent on the part of Congress to prevent any State, any possession or Commonwealth of the United States, or the District of Columbia, from exercising jurisdiction over any offense over which it would have jurisdiction in the absence of this section, nor shall anything in this section be construed as depriving State and local law enforcement authorities of responsibility for prosecuting acts that may be violations of this section and that are violations of State and local law. No prosecution of any offense described in this section shall be undertaken by the United States except upon the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General specially designated by the Attorney General that in his judgment a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice, which function of certification may not be delegated.

(2)

Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of Federal officers, or a Federal grand jury, to investigate possible violations of this section.

(b) Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, by force or threat of force willfully injures, intimidates or interferes with, or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with—

(1) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from—

(A)

voting or qualifying to vote, qualifying or campaigning as a candidate for elective office, or qualifying or acting as a poll watcher, or any legally authorized election official, in any primary, special, or general election;

(B)

participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility, or activity provided or administered by the United States;

(C)

applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any agency of the United States;

(D)

serving, or attending upon any court in connection with possible service, as a grand or petit juror in any court of the United States;

(E)

participating in or enjoying the benefits of any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance; or

(2) any person because of his race, color, religion or national origin and because he is or has been—

(A)

enrolling in or attending any public school or public college;

(B)

participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, facility or activity provided or administered by any State or subdivision thereof;

(C)

applying for or enjoying employment, or any perquisite thereof, by any private employer or any agency of any State or subdivision thereof, or joining or using the services or advantages of any labor organization, hiring hall, or employment agency;

(D)

serving, or attending upon any court of any State in connection with possible service, as a grand or petit juror;

(E)

traveling in or using any facility of interstate commerce, or using any vehicle, terminal, or facility of any common carrier by motor, rail, water, or air;

(F)

enjoying the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any inn, hotel, motel, or other establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, or of any restaurant, cafeteria, lunchroom, lunch counter, soda fountain, or other facility which serves the public and which is principally engaged in selling food or beverages for consumption on the premises, or of any gasoline station, or of any motion picture house, theater, concert hall, sports arena, stadium, or any other place of exhibition or entertainment which serves the public, or of any other establishment which serves the public and (i) which is located within the premises of any of the aforesaid establishments or within the premises of which is physically located any of the aforesaid establishments, and (ii) which holds itself out as serving patrons of such establishments; or

(3)

during or incident to a riot or civil disorder, any person engaged in a business in commerce or affecting commerce, including, but not limited to, any person engaged in a business which sells or offers for sale to interstate travelers a substantial portion of the articles, commodities, or services which it sells or where a substantial portion of the articles or commodities which it sells or offers for sale have moved in commerce; or

(4) any person because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from—

(A)

participating, without discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national origin, in any of the benefits or activities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A) through (2)(F); or

(B)

affording another person or class of persons opportunity or protection to so participate; or

(5)

any citizen because he is or has been, or in order to intimidate such citizen or any other citizen from lawfully aiding or encouraging other persons to participate, without discrimination on account of race, color, religion or national origin, in any of the benefits or activities described in subparagraphs (1)(A) through (1)(E) or subparagraphs (2)(A) through (2)(F), or participating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly opposing any denial of the opportunity to so participate—

shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death. As used in this section, the term “participating lawfully in speech or peaceful assembly” shall not mean the aiding, abetting, or inciting of other persons to riot or to commit any act of physical violence upon any individual or against any real or personal property in furtherance of a riot. Nothing in subparagraph (2)(F) or (4)(A) of this subsection shall apply to the proprietor of any establishment which provides lodging to transient guests, or to any employee acting on behalf of such proprietor, with respect to the enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of such establishment if such establishment is located within a building which contains not more than five rooms for rent or hire and which is actually occupied by the proprietor as his residence.

(c)

Nothing in this section shall be construed so as to deter any law enforcement officer from lawfully carrying out the duties of his office; and no law enforcement officer shall be considered to be in violation of this section for lawfully carrying out the duties of his office or lawfully enforcing ordinances and laws of the United States, the District of Columbia, any of the several States, or any political subdivision of a State. For purposes of the preceding sentence, the term “law enforcement officer” means any officer of the United States, the District of Columbia, a State, or political subdivision of a State, who is empowered by law to conduct investigations of, or make arrests because of, offenses against the United States, the District of Columbia, a State, or a political subdivision of a State.

(d)

For purposes of this section, the term “State” includes a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, and any commonwealth, territory, or possession of the United States.

(Added Pub. L. 90–284, title I, § 101(a), Apr. 11, 1968, 82 Stat. 73; amended Pub. L. 100–690, title VII, § 7020(a), Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4396; Pub. L. 101–647, title XII, § 1205(b), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4830; Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(c), title XXXII, § 320103(c), title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(H), (L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1971, 2109, 2147; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, § 604(b)(14)(C), (37), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3507, 3509.)

 

 

U.S. Code § 246. Deprivation of relief benefits

Whoever directly or indirectly deprives, attempts to deprive, or threatens to deprive any person of any employment, position, work, compensation, or other benefit provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of Congress appropriating funds for work relief or relief purposes, on account of political affiliation, race, color, sex, religion, or national origin, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

(Added Pub. L. 94–453, § 4(a), Oct. 2, 1976, 90 Stat. 1517; amended Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)



18 U.S. Code § 247. Damage to religious property; obstruction of persons in the free exercise of religious beliefs

(a) Whoever, in any of the circumstances referred to in subsection (b) of this section—

(1)

intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious real property, because of the religious character of that property, or attempts to do so; or

(2)

intentionally obstructs, by force or threat of force, including by threat of force against religious real property, any person in the enjoyment of that person’s free exercise of religious beliefs, or attempts to do so;

shall be punished as provided in subsection (d).

(b)

The circumstances referred to in subsection (a) are that the offense is in or affects interstate or foreign commerce.

(c)

Whoever intentionally defaces, damages, or destroys any religious real property because of the race, color, or ethnic characteristics of any individual associated with that religious property, or attempts to do so, shall be punished as provided in subsection (d).

(d) The punishment for a violation of subsection (a) or (c) of this section shall be—

(1)

if death results from acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death;

(2)

if bodily injury results to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this section, and the violation is by means of fire or an explosive, a fine under this title or imprisonment for not more that 40 years, or both;

(3)

if bodily injury to any person, including any public safety officer performing duties as a direct or proximate result of conduct prohibited by this section, results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for not more than 20 years, or both;

(4)

if damage to or destruction of property results from the acts committed in violation of this section, which damage to or destruction of such property is in an amount that exceeds $5,000, a fine in accordance with this title, imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both; and

(5)

in any other case, a fine in accordance with this title and imprisonment for not more than one year, or both.

(e)

No prosecution of any offense described in this section shall be undertaken by the United States except upon the certification in writing of the Attorney General or his designee that in his judgment a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.

(f)

As used in this section, the term “religious real property” means any church, synagogue, mosque, religious cemetery, or other religious real property, including fixtures or religious objects contained within a place of religious worship, or real property owned or leased by a nonprofit, religiously affiliated organization.

(g)

No person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any noncapital offense under this section unless the indictment is found or the information is instituted not later than 7 years after the date on which the offense was committed.

(Added Pub. L. 100–346, § 1, June 24, 1988, 102 Stat. 644; amended Pub. L. 103–322, title VI, § 60006(d), title XXXII, § 320103(d), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 1971, 2110; Pub. L. 104–155, § 3, July 3, 1996, 110 Stat. 1392; Pub. L. 104–294, title VI, §§ 601(c)(3), 605(r), Oct. 11, 1996, 110 Stat. 3499, 3511; Pub. L. 107–273, div. B, title IV, § 4002(c)(1), (e)(4), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1808, 1810; Pub. L. 115–249, § 2, Sept. 28, 2018, 132 Stat. 3162.)



18 U.S. Code § 249. Hate crime acts

(a) In General.—

(1)Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or national origin of any person—

(A)

shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—

(i)

death results from the offense; or

(ii)

the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability.—

(A)In general.—Whoever, whether or not acting under color of law, in any circumstance described in subparagraph (B) or paragraph (3), willfully causes bodily injury to any person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, a dangerous weapon, or an explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of any person—

(i)

shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, fined in accordance with this title, or both; and

(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, if—

(I)

death results from the offense; or

(II)

the offense includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.

(B)Circumstances described.—For purposes of subparagraph (A), the circumstances described in this subparagraph are that—

(i) the conduct described in subparagraph (A) occurs during the course of, or as the result of, the travel of the defendant or the victim—

(I)

across a State line or national border; or

(II)

using a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce;

(ii)

the defendant uses a channel, facility, or instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A);

(iii)

in connection with the conduct described in subparagraph (A), the defendant employs a firearm, dangerous weapon, explosive or incendiary device, or other weapon that has traveled in interstate or foreign commerce; or

(iv) the conduct described in subparagraph (A)—

(I)

interferes with commercial or other economic activity in which the victim is engaged at the time of the conduct; or

(II)

otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce.

(3)Offenses occurring in the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the united states.—

Whoever, within the special maritime or territorial jurisdiction of the United States, engages in conduct described in paragraph (1) or in paragraph (2)(A) (without regard to whether that conduct occurred in a circumstance described in paragraph (2)(B)) shall be subject to the same penalties as prescribed in those paragraphs.

(4)Guidelines.—

All prosecutions conducted by the United States under this section shall be undertaken pursuant to guidelines issued by the Attorney General, or the designee of the Attorney General, to be included in the United States Attorneys’ Manual that shall establish neutral and objective criteria for determining whether a crime was committed because of the actual or perceived status of any person.

(b) Certification Requirement.—

(1)In general.—No prosecution of any offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States, except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, or a designee, that—

(A)

the State does not have jurisdiction;

(B)

the State has requested that the Federal Government assume jurisdiction;

(C)

the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence; or

(D)

a prosecution by the United States is in the public interest and necessary to secure substantial justice.

(2)Rule of construction.—

Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to limit the authority of Federal officers, or a Federal grand jury, to investigate possible violations of this section.

(c)Definitions.—In this section—

(1)

the term “bodily injury” has the meaning given such term in section 1365(h)(4) of this title, but does not include solely emotional or psychological harm to the victim;

(2)

the term “explosive or incendiary device” has the meaning given such term in section 232 of this title;

(3)

the term “firearm” has the meaning given such term in section 921(a) of this title;

(4)

the term “gender identity” means actual or perceived gender-related characteristics; and

(5)

the term “State” includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and any other territory or possession of the United States.

(d) Statute of Limitations.—

(1)Offenses not resulting in death.—

Except as provided in paragraph (2), no person shall be prosecuted, tried, or punished for any offense under this section unless the indictment for such offense is found, or the information for such offense is instituted, not later than 7 years after the date on which the offense was committed.

(2)Death resulting offenses.—

An indictment or information alleging that an offense under this section resulted in death may be found or instituted at any time without limitation.

(Added and amended Pub. L. 111–84, div. E, §§ 4707(a), 4711, Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2838, 2842.)

42 U.S. Code Chapter 21 - CIVIL RIGHTS



SUBCHAPTER I—GENERALLY (§§ 1981 – 1996b)



Indian Sovereignty In Danger

Depending on what the Trump Administration means by , privatizing” Tribal Land. Tribal Sovereignty could very well be under direct threat over the next four years.

The only good things is that International Treaty Law is on the side of Tribes.

How adamantly Tribes demand enforcement of International law, U.S. Federal Law, and Treaties made by the United States with Indian Nations as well as establishing Tribal Enforcement of both Tribal Laws and International Treaty laws, may be the only means of defending Indian Country from the greed of billionaires determined to strip every natural resource from Tribal Land to line their pockets with wealth that in their minds belongs to them any way.

It will require that Sovereign Tribal Nations stand in unity and deny the billionaires the chance to get on track to steal Tribal Land, remove Treaty Protections and take every natural resource on every inch on Tribal Land.

The next four years may be the hardest battle against attacks on Tribal Sovereignty in the last 200 years.

If the billionaires are successful, Tribal Sovereignty will become extinct along with the cultures and and Peoples of every Tribal Nation in the United States.

Their goals are simple, take the resources and leave nothing behind. There are no Tribal Nation in this country that are not familiar with the destruction left behind when the billionaires and millionaires come into Indian Country and take resources. The evidence is the radio active uranium tailing s, destroyed land and broken lives and people left behind when they leave.

There is little left and promises of a better way of life is like them many other broken promises made by those who insisted on treaties that were made with Tribal Nations be broken so they could profit.

A strong unified front, not only by Tribal Nations, but those who believe that Tribal Sovereignty must stay intact is crucial. More so now than ever before.

The greed today resembles the greed that erupted when gold was found in Georgia in 1828.

The1828 Georgia Gold Rush was the second significant gold find in the United States and eventually resulted in the passage of the Indian Removal Act. The Indian Removal Act was passed by Congress on May 28, 1830, during the presidency of Andrew Jackson, who signed it into law two days later.

Greed driven legislation is never favorable to those whose lands and lives are at risk. Only the greedy prosper from such legislation as this.

Now once again, after a period of having to defend Tribal Lands and Sovereignty again and again, Both are now at the greatest risk they have known for generations.

If Donald Trump has his way, Tribal Land will be privatized, Tribal Sovereignty will be stripped away and resources will be stolen by words on someone else's paper once again and Tribal Land will become the land of private land owners rather than Tribal Members.

The man who promised to make America Great again, has made the deal of the century. Now he intends to make the pay off to his billionaire friends using Tribal Resources and Tribal Land.

This time, there will be no Indian Removal Act. It will simply be the Indian Extinction Act !

Something that has long been a bur under my saddle is this. Over the last forty years I have spent dealing with Tribal issues, I have heard so many people say, “There is nothing we can do, the government won't let us.”.

This just does not sound very sovereign to me.

How does one deal with drastic problems? With drastic measures !

BIA say Tribes can do this and can't do that. They control Tribal Land, Tribal resources and in many cases Tribal funds at least to some degree.

Yet we all know the government applies many unlawful and even unconstitutional actions aside from Treaty violations.

Now, sovereignty would dictate that any Sovereign Nation any where would not tolerate these things.

I think Tribes simply don't see themselves as having any bargaining chips.

I disagree with this train of thought, especially in this day and time. Today Tribes not only have their own voices, but the voices of other Nations to go with theirs. Even the voices of individuals and those who are nonnative around the world who support Tribal Issues.

Being able to bring these bargaining chip into play is another question entirely.

Just one example, open pit mining benefits no-one other than the mine owners. It is harmful to the environment, to the health of people who live near it and to everything and everyone it touches.

When this happens on Tribal Land, why don't Tribes simply say, this is not allowed on Tribal Land !

Now, I probably know the answer to this question, but for the sake of argument, lets just say that I don't.

Could it be that Some Tribal Leaders think they have no other option? Could be that even some have decided to look out for themselves rather than the People? Perhaps some simply have no idea what being a sovereign Nation actually entails? I will say this, you are never more sovereign than you act !

There are hundreds of issues out there that could be won in court. I am not an attorney, though I have for over 40 years studied every aspect of Federal Law concerning Tribal Law. I have seen so many times that Tribes have said, We can't do that, our attorneys say that it won't work. My question is, How do you know if you don't try ?

Legal precedent is

Definition :

prec·e·dent (prĕs′ĭ-dənt)

n.

1.

a. An act or instance that may be used as an example in dealing with subsequent similar instances.

b. Law A judicial decision that is binding on other equal or lower courts in the same jurisdiction as to its conclusion on a point of law, and may also be persuasive to courts in other jurisdictions, in subsequent cases involving sufficiently similar facts.

Every case that has made Legal Precedent was an argument that had not been made effectively or made at all in the past.

The actions of a Sovereign Nation are not dictated by any other Nation, other wise they are simply dependent Nations to the Sovereign Nation.

So, if the BIA is not acting in the best interest of a Tribal Nation, evict them and their representatives from Tribal Land until they do so.

If they have control over Tribal Resources, file a show cause order why the Tribe should not have control of their own resources.

If the Government makes a deal on Tribal Resources that does not benefit the Tribe, then don't sign it period ! And if a Tribe finds out after the fact that a deal is detrimental to the Tribe, simply cancel the agreement and evict anyone who is attempting to continue that “deal”.

Here I will refer you back to my former posts on Tribal Sovereignty. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/question-tribal-sovereignty-jim-windwalker/

It is not enough to say we are sovereign. We must act sovereign.

An example of how Tribal Lands are affected by the unconstitutional use of the emminent Domain Act

Notes on Dakota Access Pipeline and Eminent Domain.

A State Department report on the pipeline that was issued under the Obama administration found that there would be 3,900 direct construction jobs if it was built over one year, or 1,950 if the work was spread over two years.

Once the pipeline opens it would require only 35 full-time permanent jobs to run it, and 15 full-time temporary jobs, according to the state department report. TransCanada, the company seeking to build the pipeline, does not dispute those numbers.

The Eminent Domain, public interest requirement can not be fulfilled by a creation of temporary job creation nor the creation of only 35 permanent jobs.

Treaties and Tribal Nations (Indian Nations) by treaty language.

A treaty is an agreement under international law entered into by actors in international law, namely sovereign states and international organizations. A treaty may also be known as an (international) agreement, protocol, covenant, convention, pact, or exchange of letters, among other terms. Regardless of terminology, all of these forms of agreements are, under international law, equally considered treaties and the rules are the same.[1]

Treaties can be loosely compared to contracts: both are means of willing parties assuming obligations among themselves, and a party to either that fails to live up to their obligations can be held liable under international law.[2]

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty

31 U.S. 515

Worcester v. Georgia ()

The Cherokee Nation, then, is a distinct community occupying its own territory, with boundaries accurately described, in which the laws of Georgia can have no force, and which the citizens of Georgia have no right to enter but with the assent of the Cherokees themselves, or in conformity with treaties and with the acts of Congress. The whole intercourse between the United States and this Nation, is, by our Constitution and laws, vested in the Government of the United States.

Justice Marshall in writing the opinion for the court, included portions of the Treaties, specifically the Treaty of Holston was negotiated in July, 1791, top justify and explain the stance the Court was taking in this historic case.

Marshall was complete in his assessment of the Cherokee being a separate sovereign nation in his inclusion of this portion of the treaty of Holson and what the treaty language actually meant.

“ The third article contains a perfectly equal stipulation for the surrender of prisoners.

The fourth article declares that "the boundary between the United States and the Cherokee Nation shall be as follows: beginning," &c. We hear no more of "allotments" or of "hunting grounds." A boundary is described, between nation and nation, by mutual consent. The national character of each, the ability of each to establish this boundary, is acknowledged by the other. To preclude forever all disputes, it is agreed [p556] that it shall be plainly marked by commissioners to be appointed by each party; and, in order to extinguish forever all claim of the Cherokees to the ceded lands, an additional consideration is to be paid by the United States. For this additional consideration, the Cherokees release all right to the ceded land forever.

By the fifth article, the Cherokees allow the United States a road through their country, and the navigation of the Tennessee river. The acceptance of these cessions is an acknowledgement of the right of the Cherokees to make or withhold them.

By the sixth article, it is agreed on the part of the Cherokees that the United States shall have the sole and exclusive right of regulating their trade. No claim is made to the management of all their affairs. This stipulation has already been explained. The observation may be repeated that the stipulation is itself an admission of their right to make or refuse it.

By the seventh article, the United States solemnly guaranty to the Cherokee Nation all their lands not hereby ceded.

The eighth article relinquishes to the Cherokees any citizens of the United States who may settle on their lands, and the ninth forbids any citizen of the United States to hunt on their lands or to enter their country without a passport.

The remaining articles are equal, and contain stipulations which could be made only with a nation admitted to be capable of governing itself.”

From 1684 to 1770 The Cherokee made treaties with England as well as English Colonies.

These treaties demonstrate that the Treaties with Indian Nations extend beyond those with the United States once it was established, and make them Internationally involved Sovereign Nations.

The Treaty of Holston and the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Worcester v. Georgia define the relationship between the United States Government and not only the Cherokee Nation, but all Indian Nations established as Sovereign Nations.

The agreements made between Indian Nations with the United States Government were mutual agreements and can only be altered by the same course and process.

The US Government simply declaring that the Tribes are dependent on them does not lessen Tribal Nations status to any degree.

The “dependency” of Tribal Nations on the United States Government was not at the request of the Tribal Nations, but rather concessions made by the United States Government as a term of peace or some other provision made by treaty.

By treaty, any land belonging the any Indian Nation, is still the rightful land of the Sovereign Tribal Nation, not the United States.

Therefore any land taken from Indian Nations by the United States under the eminent domain clause of the U.S. Constitution and not by treaty has been unconstitutionally obtained and is in violation of Treaty Law. Both as practiced by the United States with Indian Nations (The Law of the land) and International Treaty Law.

It is therefore the right of Every Indian Nation to to reestablish their rights and claims over any and all unceded lands taken by the United States under the eminent domain clause of the US Constitution and to reestablish their control and jurisdiction of these lands.

Eminent Domain and Indian Nations.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Public Purpose

In the past, courts narrowly interpreted the Fifth Amendment to only allow the government to seize property for highways, government offices, military bases, and the like. Now, courts more broadly interpret the amendment to allow the government to seize property if doing so will increase the general public welfare, such as when the government uses eminent domain to seize private property to facilitate a private development that will raise the government's tax revenues. See Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S> 469 (2005).

In every sense the eminent domain clause applies to private lands held by American Citizens and in no case can be applied to the Lands belonging to Sovereign Nations.

The process of reclaiming unceded lands is as simple as enforcement of Tribal Jurisdiction.

Question Of Jurisdiction

 

The United States Government refuses to enforce Civil Rights Protections for American Indians on Tribal Land, claiming that they do not have jurisdiction because of the Sovereign Status of Tribal Governments.

Yet, The United States Government makes laws that affect these same governments without their consent or consideration.

The United States places BIA police on Reservation Lands to enforce BIA laws and the Laws of the United States Governments.

They send the FBI and other Federal Agencies onto Tribal Land for any purpose they choose.

The United States Government is enforcing laws on Indian Lands yet they can not enforce the U.S. Constitution on Indian Reservations.

How can the Laws of the United States Government have any legal standing if the Constitution has no force and effect on Tribal Land.

It can not be both ways.

Either the laws and Constitution must be equally enforced, or the Laws and constitution can not be applied.

If the latter is the case, then all Federal Employees must be removed from Tribal Land and Complete Jurisdiction must be placed in the hands of Tribal Governments. The Federal Laws can have no force and effect unless they can stand the test of constitutionality.

How can the FBI, BIA Police, US Marshall and any other Federal Agency enforce laws on Tribal Land when these laws are NOT protected by the Bill Of Rights contained in the United States Constitution? Is this done anywhere else in the United States or in any place where the United States Asserts its Jurisdiction and power? Is it only First Nation People who have NO rights in this country? In a land where even Illegal Aliens have Civil Rights...why is it that American Indians have NONE?

And if the United States Constitution is not valid or enforceable on Tribal Land, then how can the United States assume jurisdiction over offenses committed by non Indians on Tribal Land?

Yet the United States Government asserts jurisdiction over offenses committed by Indians off of Tribal Lands.

Either the United States Government must surrender Jurisdiction of all offenses committed on Tribal Land to the Tribal Courts, or the United States must extend the jurisdiction of Tribal Courts to include offenses committed by Indians off of Tribal Land.