Feds consider taking Alaska tribal land into trust

Indian Country in Alaska is long overdue. We never should have bought into the nefarious Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act in 1971 in the first place. It was the final act of Manifest Destiny disguised as what was "best for Alaska Natives"; a compromise which involved bartering almost $1 billion 1971 dollars, which is almost $6 trillion dollars today when adjusted to inflation, to Alaska Natives in exchange for Alaska's aboriginal land for the purpose of gaining access to all of the natural resources (minerals, timber, water, land) that they were living on. This congressional act was further galvanized by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980, which essentially closed off over 60% of Alaska land from private development.

Oh sure, Alaska Natives were allotted their 100 acres of land and an annual corporate paycheck in the 1971 Act, which was akin to the old "40 acres and a mule" deal that was promised by the U.S. government for all of the freed slaves at the end of the Civil War. A drop in the bucket compared to the $6 trillion in potential assets. Indian Country returns tribal sovereignty and the jurisdiction of tribal laws to the tribal courts, and self-governance according to the sovereign rights of Alaska Natives according to the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. I hope that they succeed in this.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...d72eb0-d146-11e3-a714-be7e7f142085_story.html

Feds consider taking Alaska tribal land into trust
​

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — The U.S. Department of Interior announced this week that it will consider taking Alaska tribal land into trust.

The move could lead to pockets of “Indian country,” where tribal courts and governments would have authority to create their own laws and justice systems, the Anchorage Daily News reported (http://is.gd/bUHu9y).


Currently, the only Indian country community with a reservation in the state is Metlakatla, in southeast Alaska.


The state opposes the move.


A judge in Washington, D.C., last year agreed with Alaska Native tribes, supported by nonprofit law firms, which sued in federal court saying the Interior Department should have been taking land into trust years ago.


The state has appealed the decision, but the Interior Department acted on the U.S. district court judge’s decision.


The department is opening a 60-day comment period on the subject.


Attorney Matthew Newman with the Native American Rights Fund said he expects the state, Alaska Federation of Natives, tribes and Native corporations to submit comments. He said it’s possible the proposed rule won’t be adopted, based on comments.


“I would not be bold enough to say it’s a sure thing,” Newman said. If the regulation is adopted, it would only authorize the Interior Department to accept applications for trust status, he said.


Acceptance of Indian country in Alaska was among recommendations last year from the Indian Law and Order Commission, which was born from a 2010 federal law. The bipartisan commission attributed high rates of sexual assault and domestic violence in rural Alaska to the state’s centralized judicial systems and law enforcement.


The commission recommended that tribes get increased authority to enforce in tribal courts laws they for themselves.


“The basic thrust of the Indian Law and Order Commission’s recommendation is that the state of public safety for Alaska Natives, especially for Native women who suffer high rates of domestic abuse, sexual violence and other offenses, is unacceptable; providing trust lands in Alaska in appropriate circumstances would provide additional authority for Native governments to be better partners with the State of Alaska to address these problems,” the Interior Department said in announcing the proposed rule Wednesday.


The rule barring the department from taking Alaska tribal land into trust dates back to 1980. That’s when the program was created for lower 48 Native Americans. It is among “Alaska exceptions” denying Alaska Natives the same rights as lower 48 Indians and it is partly the legacy of the 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act.
The president of the National Congress of American Indians said he was “greatly encouraged” by the proposed rule change.


“The trust relationship between the federal government and tribal governments is the foundation of all policies affecting Indian Country,” Brian Cladoosby said in a statement released Thursday. “That Alaska Native peoples have been cut out of this critical arrangement is unacceptable and has created myriad problems for those tribes.”
___

 

Alaskan Native Americans should consider the case of Cobell v. Salazar and understand they are about to get ripped off.

 

I'm sure that there are concerns: http://www.cobellsettlement.com/

What makes Alaska's case interesting is that there are shareholder records and land claims that go back to 1867 that are being considered. 1867 was when Russia sold Alaska to the United States, which is when those claims legally would have begun in U.S. courts.