Post by Okwes on Mar 7, 2008 14:35:40 GMT -5
Can government take land into trust for American Indian tribes?|
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
www.thetandd.com/articles/2008/02/26//business/12979573.txt
<http://www.thetandd.com/articles/2008/02/26//business/12979573.txt>
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has agreed to resolve a dispute
over the federal government's ability to take land into trust for
American Indian tribes.
Indian rights groups fear that the case involving the Narragansett Tribe
in Rhode Island could undermine tribal land across the country. The
justices will hear the case in the fall.
The state argued that a 1934 federal law prevents the government from
taking land into trust for tribes recognized after the law took effect,
unless Congress specifically authorized it. The Narragansetts became a
federally recognized tribe in 1983.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston rejected the state's
claim in July.
At issue is whether a 31-acre lot in Charlestown purchased by the
Narragansetts should be subject to Rhode Island law, including a
prohibition on casino gambling, or whether the parcel should be governed
by tribal and federal law.
The dispute dates to 1991, when the Narragansetts purchased the land to
build an elderly housing complex, which remains incomplete.
The state objected when the tribe asked the U.S. Department of the
Interior to take the land into federal trust, which would place it
largely under tribal and federal control.
State leaders fear the Narragansetts want to build a casino on the site.
Casino are banned under state law.
"The paramount issue of state sovereignty is the potential that this
could open the door to a casino, at least a crack, over the objections
of Rhode Island voters," said Attorney Joseph Larisa Jr., who represents
the town of Charlestown.
Narragansett Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas did not immediately respond to
a request for comment. Thomas has said his tribe intends to complete tie
unfinished elderly housing complex on the property, but could also
consider other economic development options. He has not ruled out
building a casino on the land.
The case is Carcieri v. Kempthorne, 07-526.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
www.thetandd.com/articles/2008/02/26//business/12979573.txt
<http://www.thetandd.com/articles/2008/02/26//business/12979573.txt>
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Supreme Court has agreed to resolve a dispute
over the federal government's ability to take land into trust for
American Indian tribes.
Indian rights groups fear that the case involving the Narragansett Tribe
in Rhode Island could undermine tribal land across the country. The
justices will hear the case in the fall.
The state argued that a 1934 federal law prevents the government from
taking land into trust for tribes recognized after the law took effect,
unless Congress specifically authorized it. The Narragansetts became a
federally recognized tribe in 1983.
The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston rejected the state's
claim in July.
At issue is whether a 31-acre lot in Charlestown purchased by the
Narragansetts should be subject to Rhode Island law, including a
prohibition on casino gambling, or whether the parcel should be governed
by tribal and federal law.
The dispute dates to 1991, when the Narragansetts purchased the land to
build an elderly housing complex, which remains incomplete.
The state objected when the tribe asked the U.S. Department of the
Interior to take the land into federal trust, which would place it
largely under tribal and federal control.
State leaders fear the Narragansetts want to build a casino on the site.
Casino are banned under state law.
"The paramount issue of state sovereignty is the potential that this
could open the door to a casino, at least a crack, over the objections
of Rhode Island voters," said Attorney Joseph Larisa Jr., who represents
the town of Charlestown.
Narragansett Chief Sachem Matthew Thomas did not immediately respond to
a request for comment. Thomas has said his tribe intends to complete tie
unfinished elderly housing complex on the property, but could also
consider other economic development options. He has not ruled out
building a casino on the land.
The case is Carcieri v. Kempthorne, 07-526.