In this episode, Nick Estes discusses Indigenous sovereignty, the issue of land back, and criticizes Mount Rushmore. They explore the United States v. Sioux Nation case, inadequate compensation for the Sioux people, and the role of the Supreme Court. They highlight the significance of the Powder River Country and Black Hills to indigenous nations and the erasure of indigenous governance systems. The dilemma of accepting compensation for the Black Hills is also examined, along with the problematic history of Mount Rushmore and indigenous resistance. The hosts answer listener questions and promote their Patreon Premium episode.
The Sioux Nation refused a cash settlement and instead wants their land back, highlighting the ongoing struggle for Indigenous sovereignty.
The limitations of the Supreme Court in addressing tribal sovereignty indicate the need for grassroots advocacy and legislative action to reclaim tribal rights.
Deep dives
The Black Hills Case and Indigenous Land Rights
The podcast episode discusses the Sioux Nation versus the United States case, also known as the Black Hills case. It explores the historical background of the case and its modern implications. The Sioux were granted a cash settlement for their land, but they refused to accept the funds, as they want the land back instead. The episode highlights the inadequacy of existing laws and the unwillingness of the federal government to address the colonization of tribal lands. The Supreme Court's role in tribal sovereignty and federal Indian law is also questioned.
The Legal Background and Supreme Court Opinions
The episode delves into the legal background of the case, touching upon the Marshall Trilogy, which subjugated tribal claims to federal government claims. It mentions the United States versus Sioux Nation case that started in the 1920s and was finally resolved in 1980. The Supreme Court ruled that the Sioux Nation should be compensated for the land, but the tribe has refused the funds due to concerns that it would compromise their claim to the land. Justice William Rehnquist's dissent is criticized for downplaying the historical injustices suffered by the tribe.
Challenges in Tribal Sovereignty and Representation
The episode examines the limitations of the Supreme Court in addressing tribal sovereignty and suggests that tribal representation in US courts may be fraught with conflicts of interest. It discusses the complexities of representing the broader tribal interests and highlights the need for grassroots advocacy and legislative action. The importance of reclaiming and advocating for tribal rights, including land back, is emphasized. The failures of the Supreme Court in federal Indian law are attributed to a narrow and colonial framework rooted in the country's history of dispossession and genocide.
Organizing and Resistance for Land Rights
The podcast explores various avenues of organizing and resistance in the fight for land rights. It highlights past and ongoing efforts by the Great Sioux Nation, including armed resistance, legislation, and grassroots mobilization. The episode discusses the challenges faced by tribes, such as retaliation from the state and attempts to reclaim and rehabilitate the Black Hills. It also emphasizes the need for alliances, shared grievances, and ongoing struggle for justice and autonomy.