Court: Eagle feathers only for American Indians

[jimmy olsen]

You are looking at it from a wrong side. What it really does is that it allows one religion/ethnicity to commit acts that are illegal for the rest of the populace. That's the very antithesis of equality under law.

What's next? Descendants of Aztecs can perform human sacrifice?

Um it allows those who belong to a federally protected self-governing nation-within-nation to do so.  Not simply those who are of a certain religion or ethnicity.  Our treaties with certain native tribes require certain things.  There is no Aztec reservation but if there was I am sure the Feds would not sign an agreement giving them the ability to raid others for the purposes of grabbing sacrifices

Sure they would, as long as they were restricted to raiding only other native tribes.

[Valmy]

The Indians can't go around killing eagles to get them either.  They get them from a federal eagle carcass repository. 

Yes I am aware of that.

[Lucidor]

Various exemptions and recognition of special rights and status for Natives is a common feature of legal systems in Canada and the US.  There is a different historic situation and reality to take into context than in Europe.

We only let pure-breed Sami own reindeer. Some Samis can't, and some mixes aren't allowed to do it.

We have some weird racist laws as well.

[Valdemar]

We let Greenland hunt seals, but we do not prohibit the rest of the world to wear sealfurs.

Nor should it be disallowed to wear a russian orthodox cross unless you are an ethnic russian. They are mixing race, heritage, and religious symbols into one big mess here.

V

[Martinus]

You are looking at it from a wrong side. What it really does is that it allows one religion/ethnicity to commit acts that are illegal for the rest of the populace. That's the very antithesis of equality under law.

What's next? Descendants of Aztecs can perform human sacrifice?

Um it allows those who belong to a federally protected self-governing nation-within-nation to do so.  Not simply those who are of a certain religion or ethnicity.  Our treaties with certain native tribes require certain things.  There is no Aztec reservation but if there was I am sure the Feds would not sign an agreement giving them the ability to raid others for the purposes of grabbing sacrifices

Which is a weird thing in itself. These nations are not sovereign. Allowing these treaties to stand (both to the detriment of these "nations", and flying in the face of the principle of equality under law) is a mistake that is unnecessary.

[Valmy]

Which is a weird thing in itself. These nations are not sovereign. Allowing these treaties to stand (both to the detriment of these "nations", and flying in the face of the principle of equality under law) is a mistake that is unnecessary.

Might as well.  The native peoples are used to the white man breaking all his treaties with them, might as well do it one more time.

[garbon]

Which is a weird thing in itself. These nations are not sovereign. Allowing these treaties to stand (both to the detriment of these "nations", and flying in the face of the principle of equality under law) is a mistake that is unnecessary.

Well they don't have full sovereignty but they do have sovereignty.

These tribes possess the right to form their own government, to enforce laws (both civil and criminal), to tax, to establish requirements for membership, to license and regulate activities, to zone and to exclude persons from tribal territories. Limitations on tribal powers of self-government include the same limitations applicable to states; for example, neither tribes nor states have the power to make war, engage in foreign relations, or coin money (this includes paper currency)

[The Brain]

You are looking at it from a wrong side. What it really does is that it allows one religion/ethnicity to commit acts that are illegal for the rest of the populace. That's the very antithesis of equality under law.

What's next? Descendants of Aztecs can perform human sacrifice?

Um it allows those who belong to a federally protected self-governing nation-within-nation to do so.  Not simply those who are of a certain religion or ethnicity.  Our treaties with certain native tribes require certain things.  There is no Aztec reservation but if there was I am sure the Feds would not sign an agreement giving them the ability to raid others for the purposes of grabbing sacrifices

Which is a weird thing in itself. These nations are not sovereign. Allowing these treaties to stand (both to the detriment of these "nations", and flying in the face of the principle of equality under law) is a mistake that is unnecessary.

The right to be welfare junkie trumps all.

[Berkut]

I am surprised at the surprise over this ruling.

It seems pretty straighforward to me.

The state has an interest in protecting an endangered species. So they make laws to do so, which include a law against posessing eagle feathers. In and of itself, this is largely not that interesting.

But now we see their is a competing interest - some peoples religious beliefs include the use of eagle feathers. So we have conflicting interests between the states desire to protect an endangered species and individuals desires to practice their religion.

Seems pretty normal for the court and legislators to figure out how to balance those two interests in a reasonable way.

There is a finite supply of eagle feathers, so it seems pretty reasonable to restrict their distribution, and to do so on the basis of actual membership in tribes that have a known and certain interest in the use of these items for religious purposes. Does that mean that some people who have just as profound religious views are going to get screwed? Sure - but what is the alternative? If you let anyone claiming membership in a religious group that like feathers, then I would guess the federal attempt to protect eagles would fail, hence that solution would not protect the states interest in protecting eagles.

Comparing this to aztecs performing human sacrifice is a bit silly - this is at the end of the day a practical[/i solution to competing interests. I am pretty sure we established a long time ago that nobody's freedom to practice their religion extends to the freedom to kill anyone.

[Ed Anger]

Poland has a central repository for Jew carcasses.

[Jacob]

Berkut is making complete sense here.

[The Brain]

Poland has a central repository for Jew carcasses.

myth

[The Brain]

I guess asking the Indians to grow the fuck up is out of the question.

[Berkut]

Berkut as always is making complete sense here.

FYP

[Tonitrus]

I guess asking the Indians to grow the fuck up is out of the question.

Perhaps we can ask them to do that when everyone else in the world does too.