tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039650298276806223.post7462446843707128534..comments2024-03-22T19:42:41.523-07:00Comments on CENSORED NEWS: Black Hills Treaty Fishing: Galvanizing Sovereignty and LawUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039650298276806223.post-91018186873143090132009-03-11T06:14:00.000-07:002009-03-11T06:14:00.000-07:00Bourland, U.S. S. Ct.: "Congress has the power to ...Bourland, U.S. S. Ct.: <BR/><BR/>"Congress has the power to abrogate Indians' treaty rights, see, e. g., Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Kneip, 430 U.S. 584, 594 (1977), though we usually insist that Congress clearly express its intent to do so. See Menominee Tribe of Indians v. United States, 391 U.S. 404, 412-413 (1968); United States v. Dion, 476 U.S. 734, 738 (1986). See also County of Yakima v. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039650298276806223.post-90845079936759291562009-03-10T00:31:00.000-07:002009-03-10T00:31:00.000-07:00It’s so nice site. We love to see more on this sit...It’s so nice site. We love to see more on this site. Keep on updating… MonkAreYou Bali<BR/>*gsgdsagAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039650298276806223.post-23191693323584809102009-03-09T12:18:00.000-07:002009-03-09T12:18:00.000-07:00There is nothing unique or extra-ordinary about th...There is nothing unique or extra-ordinary about this. Russell is simply asserting existing and long established treaty rights as a separately sovereign people (who were) in treaty with the United States, and article 6 assures us any treaty (and hence treaty granted rights) are the supreme law of the land. At the very least, it is clearly a federal matter, not a state one.<BR/><BR/>If on the Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com