Herrera vs Wyoming

[pianoman9701]

WY certainly follows its own path, as with going up against the USFWS with regard to the wolves. I have little doubt this will eventually be overturned by the SCOTUS.

[Jpmiller]

The crow have no elk on their rez? Really, because the pics I see coming from there say other wise. But then again, as it pertains to hw experts of Indian country i dont know what I'm talking about.

 I have a lease down there, have driven through about every year for years and never seen so much as a doe on the actual Rez.....just sayin.

I've never seen a cougar in the thousands of miles I've put on in the forests of wa. So does that mean they're not there.

All I see in the deer and elk threads is guys who saw 9 cats and no other game and you've never seen one?!?! Must be seeing too many deer and elk then lol

[sagerat]

WY certainly follows its own path, as with going up against the USFWS with regard to the wolves. I have little doubt this will eventually be overturned by the SCOTUS.

I’m glad somebody has the balls to do it. I don’t know why you tribal boys are getting so worked up, pretty sure you’re safe here.

[pianoman9701]

I'm not a "tribal boy" (not really a very respectful term for your fellow hunters), but I understand the law surrounding treaties and they're protected by congressional approval and the signature of the President until they're overturned.

[sagerat]

I'm not a "tribal boy" (not really a very respectful term for your fellow hunters), but I understand the law surrounding treaties and they're protected by congressional approval and the signature of the President until they're overturned.

Sorry, wasn’t referring to you. Why is that disrespectful? What term should I use since you’re the expert?

[pianoman9701]

Never mind. If you can't see it, it wouldn't do any good. Carry on.

[Igor]

I'm not an attorney, (and I've never stayed at a Holiday Inn Express), but how are treaties constitutional when the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment states "nor shall any State deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws" ? 

[pianoman9701]

Native tribes are sovereign and the treaties we agreed to are followed as any treaty with any sovereign nation. I'm not making a comment on whether or not I agree with what's in the treaties. I'm strictly speaking to our responsibilities of abiding to them. I am an attorney on the internet, by the way.

[Igor]

So. native tribes do not fall within the jurisdiction of the states?

[pianoman9701]

So. native tribes do not fall within the jurisdiction of the states?

I believe not while on their reservations. They fall under tribal law. And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations.

[Igor]

So. native tribes do not fall within the jurisdiction of the states?

I believe not while on their reservations. They fall under tribal law. . And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations..

And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations.

That is the part that has always puzzled me (maybe I'm just not real bright).  Why is there not "equal protection" for all persons under those particular circumstances?  Are they under state jurisdiction, or not, when off their reservation?

[pianoman9701]

So. native tribes do not fall within the jurisdiction of the states?

I believe not while on their reservations. They fall under tribal law. . And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations..

And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations.

That is the part that has always puzzled me (maybe I'm just not real bright).  Why is there not "equal protection" for all persons under those particular circumstances?  Are they under state jurisdiction, or not, when off their reservation?

Because those conditions were part of a treaty passed by the US Congress. It's the law. Not every treaty is the same. Some apply only to rights on lands within reservations. Some include rights off the reservation. I believe the ceded lands of the Yakima are an example. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

[Timberstalker]

The crow have no elk on their rez? Really, because the pics I see coming from there say other wise. But then again, as it pertains to hw experts of Indian country i dont know what I'm talking about.

 I have a lease down there, have driven through about every year for years and never seen so much as a doe on the actual Rez.....just sayin.

I've never seen a cougar in the thousands of miles I've put on in the forests of wa. So does that mean they're not there.

Some people have a knack for cougars, some don’t.

[Igor]

So. native tribes do not fall within the jurisdiction of the states?

I believe not while on their reservations. They fall under tribal law. . And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations..

And hunting and fishing rights often include area off the reservations.

That is the part that has always puzzled me (maybe I'm just not real bright).  Why is there not "equal protection" for all persons under those particular circumstances?  Are they under state jurisdiction, or not, when off their reservation?

Because those conditions were part of a treaty passed by the US Congress. It's the law. Not every treaty is the same. Some apply only to rights on lands within reservations. Some include rights off the reservation. I believe the ceded lands of the Yakima are an example. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

It's the law.

Stupid me.............I always thought the United States Constitution (including the 14th Amendment) was the law.  I guess when you are a politician you can cherry-pick which parts of the law you want to abide by and which parts you don't. 

[pianoman9701]

The power of the Legislature to pass treaties is part of the Constitution in Article I. Again, I'm not saying I agree or disagree with the rights afforded Natives through these treaties. Just that the people we elected to Congress passed them. Congress can also nullify them. Get on the phone!