Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
-
Upload
paul-maas-risenhoover -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
1/27
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
Oneida Indian Nation
v. 05-6408-cv (L)
Madison County
Docket Nos. 05-6408-cv (L); 06-5168-cv (CON); 06-5515-cv
(CON)
Motion to intervene jus tertii for the US, 25 USC 194, 25
USC 175, and for reconsideration by the panel and or en
banc by the full Circuit
The Circuit panel decision is reported on remand at
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-
d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-
6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/is
ysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/ .
The Constitution provides that the US abides by the law of
belligerent occupation, recognizing the captured peoples, as Indians
not taxed (US ex rel Standing Bear v Crooker, Rubi v Mindoro).
In this character, the Oneida Nation, remains not subject to any
taxation authority exercised under the authority of the United States
or their New York authorities and counties thereof. The Congress,
and US, by the law of war, lack authority to have pretended to havein any way impaired, impaled, or genocidally affected the national
character of the Oneida Nations peoples, by either the fifteenth
amendment or the sixteenth amendment. The fourteenth
amendment expressly excluded Indians not taxed, as not subject to
the jurisdiction of the US at birth (8 USC 1401(b)). The fifteenth
amendment only forbids discrimination against citizens, but not the
domestic subjects or nationals, as wards of the nation, in a condition
of alienage (Hodges v US, 203 US 1). The Oneida Nation aredomestic because this is their land, and dependent because
http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/doc/05-6408_opn.pdf#xml=http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov/decisions/isysquery/c733894c-d56c-4250-8441-50c80e1b2033/2/hilite/ -
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
2/27
occupied, and that is the sole sense of the Worcester decision
opining the Indians not taxed to be domestic dependent nations,
that is, occupied Indian nations. The sixteenth amendment affects
only a releasing of the prior bonds of taxation and representation asdependent on allocative enumerations, and does not affect the
exclusion of the Indians not taxed. Minor v Happerssett holds that
the expressly excluded (ie Indians not taxed, as not born, subject to
the jurisdiction) remain without the national citizenship, though
holding, by the law of war, and necessity, the nationality
protections, of the law of belligerent occupation, following conquest,
etc.
The original alloidal aboriginal title of the Oneida Nation (Carino v
Insular Government), remains, occupied (US v Fullard-Leo, Duncan v
Kahanamoku). There are no means for the US to rewrite history and
make it legally appear otherwise, as if the Indians conquered, were
yet free to relinquish their territories, voluntarily.
The panels averred fee title refers merely to usufructuary
freehold rights in an estate deemed to run with allotted lands, and
does not affect the de jure continuing sovereignty of the OneidaNation to their lands occupied by the United States and their New
York authorities and counties thereof. During the long occupation,
the Oneida Nation remains the Sovereign de jure, for which the
United States, act as Trustee, and Administering Authority,
superintending in situ, the Oneida lands, under the delegated
elected forms of military government (Duarte v Dade, elections may
be authorized by a Military Governor, the Commander in Chief or
Congress). There are no means by which the US can become theOneida Nation, nor the authorities known as New York or the
counties thereof. The apparent exercise of sovereignty by those
entities, however styled, are the de jure sovereign rights of the
Oneida Nation, as occupied, and cannot affect an extinguishment or
diminution of the Oneida Nation, which does not exist at the
pleasure of the United States or New York, but antecedent thereto.
The existence of the Oneida is not dependent on the US, dependent
means merely occupied. The Oneida are domestic, because, notdependent on the US, but occupied in their own lands, their own
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
3/27
domestic place, and thus domestic. That the Supreme Court of the
US had to resort to tremendously clever prevarications of
nomenclature to obfuscate these obvious and apparent facts,
merely serves to remind white America (Wilson v Omaha Tribe, 25USC 194) of the humility that ought to prevail when courts act to
affect the natural rights of the Oneida peoples during our long
occupation.
There is no act of surrender, cession, or other means by which the
United States can change these historical legal facts and the
operation of the law of belligerent occupation on these facts.
The President is a Commander in Chief, though a civilian
commander could have been otherwise appointed, to reflect these
high legal principles. The Indians not taxed, are not aliens,
(Cherokee v Georgia, Elk v Wilkins, Rubi v Mindoro), to their own
lands, though not citizens of our republican administration of the
occupancy affecting their native lands, until extended involuntarily
the political and civil rights attached to 8 USC 1401(b) without
prejudice to their tribal allegiance and tribal property and other
rights.
As long as the Oneida Nation exists in fact, their peoples remain
Indians not taxed. This status does not arise from the United States,
but from the Oneida Nation, and in light of the actual conquest
made by the United States in occupation of the Oneida Nation.
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?
type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indians
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indianshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indianshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indianshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indianshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indianshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902ap2.p0433&q1=christian&q2=california&q3=indians -
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
4/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
5/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
6/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
7/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
8/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
9/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
10/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
11/27
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?
type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isiz
e=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizen
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizenhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizenhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizenhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizenhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizenhttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&entity=FRUS.FRUS1902.p0871&id=FRUS.FRUS1902&isize=M&q1=cuero&q2=citizen -
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
12/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
13/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
14/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
15/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
16/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
17/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
18/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
19/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
20/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
21/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
22/27
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
23/27
As Justice Torruella has rightly opined in numerous extraterritoriality
cases of recent disposition, the Congress is without authority to act
as the occupier of the world.So too, the assertion by the legislatures permitted in New York and
the counties thereof, during the long occupation of the Oneida
Nation, are without authority to affect the natural, inevitable,
factual, historical, belligerent occupation, of these Indians not taxed.
As long as the Oneida Nation and her peoples exist, they remain
Indians not taxed, even if enjoying the privileges and immunities of
naturalized statutory US citizenship in addition to their nationality
protection under the Fourteenth Amendment, without prejudice to
their actual de jure Oneida nationality status and tribal property and
other rights, 8 USC 1401(b).
The counties of New York, naturally lack any authority to legislate in
respect of the Oneida Nation, and to tax the same, in any respect, in
relation to lands or any other matter. In their character of citizens of
the United States, 8 USC 1401(b), the Indians may be citizens of a
state, for enjoyment of equal protection, but this is expresslywithout prejudice to their ultimate, plenary, primary, inalienable (Elk
v Wilkins, US ex rel Standing v Crooker) allegiance (during
occupation voluntary expatriation cannot operate consonant the law
of war,
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?
type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889
v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wards
of the treaty of Managua can afford no criterion, for in every case ofdispute it may be argued that the rights of self-government on the
one
hand, or of sovereignty on the other, are invaded.
The case is not without analogies. In the treaty with France of April
30, 1803, for the cession of Louisiana it is provided that "the inhabi-
tants of the ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the
United States, and admitted as soon as possible, according to the
prin-ciples of the Federal Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights,
http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wardshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wardshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wardshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wardshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wardshttp://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=turn&id=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1&entity=FRUS.FRUS188889v01p1.p0902&q1=alaska&q2=guardian&q3=wards -
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
24/27
advantages, and immunities of citizens of the United States and in
the
mean time they shall be maintained and protected in the free
enjoymentof their liberty, property, and the religion they profess." In the
treaty
with Spain of February 22, 1919, for the cession of Florida, it was
stip-
ulated that "4the inhabitants of the ceded territories shall be
secured
in
the free exercise of their religion, without any restriction," and
that
they should be "admitted to the enjoyment of all the privileges,
rights,
and immunities of the citizens of the United States." By the terms
of
the treaty with Russia of March 30, 1867, for the cession of Alaska,
the
inhabitants, with the exception of uncivilized native tribes, are to be
admitted to citizenship, "and shall be maintained and protected inthe
free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion. The
uncivilized
tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United
States
may from time to time adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes of that
country." In all these cases, as will be observed, the ceding Govern-
ment has received assurances of the treatment to be accorded tothe
inhabitants of the ceded territory; but in no case in our diplomatic
history ha' any one of these Governments asserted a right to
intervene
in our domestic affairs. Difficulties have at times arisen between
the
FederalGovernment and the inhabitants of Louisiana and Florida,
butneither France nor Spain ever pretended that our treaty stipulations
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
25/27
gave them a right to take part in the settlement of such disputes.
The
laws affecting the Territory of Alaska may be, and in some respects
noware, unlike those governing the other Territories of the United
States.
But it must be apparent that were the Indians inhabiting those pos-
sessions to protest against alleged discriminations to the Czar of
Russia,
the treaty of 1867 would not authorize His Imperial Majesty to
demand
of the United States a different treatment of our Indian wards; and
that such interposition, if-made, would certainly not be regarded
favor-
ably by this Government.
The ceding government in such cases retains, and can retain, no
right
of control or supervision over the conduct of the guardian to whom
it
commits the inhabitants whose allegiance is changed.
And so in the case under consideration. The stipulations of thetreaty of Managua relative to the privileges to be accorded to the
Mos-
quito Indians were not for the benefit of Great Britain, and are not
en-
forceable by her, They were solely made for the benefit of those In-
dians, who were regarded by the express language of the treaty as
at
liberty to accept or reject its stipulations. Through their chief theydid
deliberately accept them, and on the withdrawal of British
protection
placed themselves under the sovereign power of the Republic of
Nica-
ragua, and agreed to accept her public pledges as a sufficient
guaranty
that the agreements therein contained touching their right of self-gov-
-
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
26/27
ernment would be carried out in good faith.
The President can not but regard the continued exercise of the
claim
on the part of Great Britain to interfere on behalf of these Indians asthe assertion of a British protectorate in another formi; more
especially
when'this effort is directed to prohibiting Nicaragua from exercising
766
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
military jurisdiction in the immediate neighborhood of the Atlantic
mouth ot the projected canal.
The United States can never see with indifference the re-establish-
ment of such a protectorate.).
Certificate of Service by email to:
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected] , [email protected],
[email protected] , [email protected] ,
Samuel.Alexander @usdoj.gov , [email protected] ,[email protected] ,
Thomas [email protected] , "Communications, Civil (CIV)"
,
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected],
http://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_contact.asp?ID=545http://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_contact.asp?ID=552mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_contact.asp?ID=545http://www.nixonpeabody.com/attorneys_contact.asp?ID=552mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected] -
8/3/2019 Oneida Reconsideration Motion en Banc Jus Tertii Pro Se
27/27
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected], jo-