Non-federally Controlled Indian Land And Juice....

[HULKSTER]

I know a buddy of mine who has a Native American friend who lives on a reservation in Connecticut that is "owned" by a certain registered group of Native Americans. Since Indian land supposedly belongs only to the Indians, and the U.S. federal government is "supposed" not to have any control or ownership of their land whatsoever, would someone get in trouble if they had an international package delivered to an address located on a registered Indian Reservation? Wouldn't it essentially be a "country to country/sovereign state" transaction, where the U.S. federal government could have no say or jurisdiction over the matter, say if someone sent a package from the UK to Mexico?

 

[HULKSTER]

bump again

 

[HULKSTER]

bumppitty, bump-bump

 

[Zyglamail]

Thats a very interesting question. I would imagine that if the us postal service was used they could drum up some kind of charge.

 

[HULKSTER]

Thats a very interesting question. I would imagine that if the us postal service was used they could drum up some kind of charge.

However, if it was just sent by UPS mail, US citizens do not have the right against unlawful searches as they would for USPS mail, according to Rick Collin's book. So if I wanted to get around using USPS standard airmail, I would then face the problem of using UPS or FEDEX, which could be opened without a search warrant. Best bet? Use USPS....they have to come up with solid reasons as to why to open a package, UPS and FEDEX can do whatever the hell they want.

 

[newpump]

BUMP - so is it time to go visit a reservation? any real lawyers out there?? weigh in guys!!

 

[HULKSTER]

bump

 

[bbkingpin]

By Hulkster: "would someone get in trouble if they had an international package delivered to an address located on a registered Indian Reservation? "

The short answer is "Yes." States have criminal jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians on the Indian reservation. The Federal government has ALWAYS had criminal jurisdiction over the Indian lands.

Indian lands are held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Indian people. To illustrate, as a precondition to statehood a new state (e.g., Montana) was required to include in its state constitution that all Indian lands within its borders "shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the congress of the United States."

States were later conferred civil and criminal jurisdiction by Public Law 280, enacted by the U.S. Congress. Congress enacted Public Law 280 to deal with the problem of lawlessness on certain Indian reservations and the absence of adequate tribal institutions for law enforcement. Also of concern was the lack of adequate Indian forums for resolving private legal disputes between reservation Indians and between Indians and other private citizens.

However, states are not allowed to tax the Indian lands within their borders. (Imagine NO property taxes.) Also, a state's regulatory laws (ex: licensing and permit requirements) have no control over Indians within the reservation. States cannot tax income that is derived from activities within the reservation. (So, if an Indian lives on the reservation but works outside the reservation the state can tax the income earned outside the reservation. But the state cannot tax the Indian for income earned within the reservation.)

Basically, it is up to the U.S. Congress to determine what, if any, control the states have over the Indian reservations within their borders. The Indian sovereignty doctrine basically says that the Indian reservations are free from STATE jurisdiction and control. However, the Indian reservations are subject to the legislation of the United States Congress and its administrative regulations. So, the Indians do not answer to the individual states but they answer to the federal government. And if the federal government determines that states should have control over the Indian reservations, then Congress can legislate as such. And they did just that with the passage of Public Law 280.

 

[HULKSTER]

By Hulkster: "would someone get in trouble if they had an international package delivered to an address located on a registered Indian Reservation? "

The short answer is "Yes." States have criminal jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians on the Indian reservation. The Federal government has ALWAYS had criminal jurisdiction over the Indian lands.

Indian lands are held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the Indian people. To illustrate, as a precondition to statehood a new state (e.g., Montana) was required to include in its state constitution that all Indian lands within its borders "shall remain under the absolute jurisdiction and control of the congress of the United States."

States were later conferred civil and criminal jurisdiction by Public Law 280, enacted by the U.S. Congress. Congress enacted Public Law 280 to deal with the problem of lawlessness on certain Indian reservations and the absence of adequate tribal institutions for law enforcement. Also of concern was the lack of adequate Indian forums for resolving private legal disputes between reservation Indians and between Indians and other private citizens.

However, states are not allowed to tax the Indian lands within their borders. Also, a state's regulatory laws (ex: licensing and permits) have no control over Indians within the reservation. States cannot tax income that is derived from activities within the reservation. (So, if an Indian lives on the reservation but works outside the reservation the state can tax the income earned outside the reservation. But the state cannot tax the Indian for income earned within the reservation.)

Basically, it is up to the U.S. Congress to determine what, if any, control the states have over the Indian reservations within their borders. The Indian sovereignty doctrine basically says that the Indian reservations are free from STATE jurisdiction and control. However, the Indian reservations are subject to the legislation of the United States Congress and its administrative regulations. So, the Indians do not answer to the individual states but they answer to the federal government. And if the federal government determines that states should have control over the Indian reservations, then Congress can legislate as such. And they did just that with the passage of Public Law 280.

That's fucking bullshit. So in reality, after all this crap about "giving back" to the Indians what the white man took, and all the great benefits and tax breaks they now enjoy compared to the average U.S. citizen, THEY, AS A PEOPLE, STILL DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO MAKE THEIR OWN LAWS AND LIVE THEIR OWN LIVES. They must do what the federal government orders them to do, BASED ON THE WHITE MAN'S LAWS. This is total bullshit. Who the fuck does Uncle Sam think he is? The current, sitting U.S. Federal Government needs to be overthrown. Additionally, the FBI, CIA, NSA and IRS need to have their roles dramitically reduced, official taxpayer and corporate funded political parties need to be abolished, and a Libertarian-style government, set in the ideals of Thomas Jefferson, instituted. And for those in law enforcement/gov. reading this, this is my Constitutionally-protected 1st Amendment Right to FREE SPEECH, so none of you jerkoffs can do a damn thing about it!

 

[HULKSTER]

By the way, Karm to all who have helped me.