Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

1LizardWizard t1_ivhdvh2 wrote

Reply to comment by TigerBasket in Native child welfare law faces major Supreme Court challenge by Banemorth

Probably gonna pull some shit like with Roe and say that there is no historical precedent for giving native Americans welfare and therefore it is unconstitutional….

6

WyrdHarper t1_ivig7ci wrote

Oh there is. Not that it makes much of a difference.

There’s Cherokee Nation vs Georgia (1831) and Worcester vs Georgia (1832) where the supreme court ruled that the government could not forcibly evict 15000 or so people whose families had been living in “Georgia” for generations. Andrew Jackson then proceeded to ignore that and thus started the trail of tears.

Honestly at this point it wouldn’t surprise me if they decided to overrule the 1879 ruling that First Americans were “persons”

6

greeneggzN t1_ivi46kh wrote

The thing is that ICWA is not preferential treatment based on race, it’s about nation to nation agreements and special political/citizen status of tribal members that allows laws and policies like ICWA to exist. If ICWA is struck down it will likely have a domino affect in the realm of Indian law

4

Art-Zuron t1_ivhkfc8 wrote

Well, they're not wrong really... sadly. (welfare as in respect and care and not genociding them)

3

1LizardWizard t1_ivhmt9w wrote

Hah. Gosh I didn’t even think about that wordplay. Rather macabre…

1