Post by Okwes on Feb 3, 2006 10:09:18 GMT -5
Dividing Spoils, Dividing Tribes
Dividing Spoils, Dividing Tribes
As casino cash flows in, disenrollment is fracturing some Native
American communities
—By Nick Rose
February 2, 2006 Issue
www.utne.com/webwatch/2006_235/news/11967-1.html
Native Americans struggled long for sovereignty, and the victory now
seems to be breeding discord, not unity, in the tribes. Casinos have
been a financial windfall, and now former tribe members are claiming
that tribe leaders are kicking members out on false pretenses in
order to claim a larger portion of the casino earnings for themselves.
The disenrolled have looked to the US courts for help, but that help
has not been forthcoming. Eliza Strickland, writing for the East Bay
Express, says that Thurgood Marshall's words from a 1978 Supreme
Court ruling still hold truck: "A tribe's right to define its own
membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to
its existence as an independent political community." The courts have
claimed that they have no jurisdiction over how a tribe administrates
its membership roles. Thus, the disenrolled have no recourse but to
appeal to the very tribal entity that kicked them out in the first
place.
According to Strickland, the tribes' official position seems to be
that casinos have no bearing on membership claims; yet the spate of
membership disputes suggests otherwise. Strickland cites an
Associated Press estimate that more than 1,100 people are engaged in
membership disputes in California alone. Former members allege that
tribes are not only disenrolling people out of greed but also
silencing current members with the threat of disenrollment.
Though some tribal leaders appear to be motivated by greed, those
fighting to become (or be reinstated as) members say they are driven
by something deeper. For Marilyn Vann, who determined through a DNA
test that she was part Cherokee, the tribe's denial is frustrating.
Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Vann said that rather than
attempting to take advantage of the tribe, she was looking for a way
to give back. Others echo this sentiment, saying that the real-world
disadvantages of disenrollment pale in comparison to the feeling of
loss encountered when excluded from their community.
DNA testing now seems to be the only way some tribes will grant
membership. But for Vann, whose test did little to help her
application, and others, this raises the question of what it means to
be Native American. Formally excluded from a community they once
called their own and faced with a Kafkaesque legal scenario, former
members are at a loss. All they know is that they surely have lost
something.
Dividing Spoils, Dividing Tribes
As casino cash flows in, disenrollment is fracturing some Native
American communities
—By Nick Rose
February 2, 2006 Issue
www.utne.com/webwatch/2006_235/news/11967-1.html
Native Americans struggled long for sovereignty, and the victory now
seems to be breeding discord, not unity, in the tribes. Casinos have
been a financial windfall, and now former tribe members are claiming
that tribe leaders are kicking members out on false pretenses in
order to claim a larger portion of the casino earnings for themselves.
The disenrolled have looked to the US courts for help, but that help
has not been forthcoming. Eliza Strickland, writing for the East Bay
Express, says that Thurgood Marshall's words from a 1978 Supreme
Court ruling still hold truck: "A tribe's right to define its own
membership for tribal purposes has long been recognized as central to
its existence as an independent political community." The courts have
claimed that they have no jurisdiction over how a tribe administrates
its membership roles. Thus, the disenrolled have no recourse but to
appeal to the very tribal entity that kicked them out in the first
place.
According to Strickland, the tribes' official position seems to be
that casinos have no bearing on membership claims; yet the spate of
membership disputes suggests otherwise. Strickland cites an
Associated Press estimate that more than 1,100 people are engaged in
membership disputes in California alone. Former members allege that
tribes are not only disenrolling people out of greed but also
silencing current members with the threat of disenrollment.
Though some tribal leaders appear to be motivated by greed, those
fighting to become (or be reinstated as) members say they are driven
by something deeper. For Marilyn Vann, who determined through a DNA
test that she was part Cherokee, the tribe's denial is frustrating.
Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, Vann said that rather than
attempting to take advantage of the tribe, she was looking for a way
to give back. Others echo this sentiment, saying that the real-world
disadvantages of disenrollment pale in comparison to the feeling of
loss encountered when excluded from their community.
DNA testing now seems to be the only way some tribes will grant
membership. But for Vann, whose test did little to help her
application, and others, this raises the question of what it means to
be Native American. Formally excluded from a community they once
called their own and faced with a Kafkaesque legal scenario, former
members are at a loss. All they know is that they surely have lost
something.