Monday, May 10, 2010

Letter Requesting Rep. Nick Rahall to hold Oversight Hearings on ICRA

Attached and pasted below is a letter to the House Resources Committee requesting that it hold oversight hearings on the growing problem of rights abuses in Indian Country and the lack of enforcement of the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. This request is made on the heels and is intended to support a similar request made by Congressman Mike Thompson (Dem-CA) on April 29, 2010 to Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (Dem-WV).


Please take the time to download, sign, and fax to the Committee. We must do our part to move the hearing forward and make it a reality and we need YOUR help.


HRCrequest5.10.10[1]

7 comments:

Anonymous said...

I know of 25 signed sealed and mailed letters today. Will try for 25 more tomarrow. My goal is 100 by Friday!

O Pechanga said...

Excellent work! Thank you and hopefully, Rep. Nick Rahall will see how much it's needed.

Sam Rayburn said that the ICRA was NOT complete. Maybe a Rayhall-Thompson amendment for the ICRA.

It's has a nice ring to it.

'aamokat said...

Our anonymous critic will say again, "the disenrolled lost their tribal membership because the facts were not on their side and the tribe was simply correcting an error in the membership rolls.

They went through established procedures that afforded them a simple due process."

1. We didn't get due process in anyway, shape, or form because the tribal council and the enrollment committee allowed close relatives of people who submitted and/or signed statements against our tribal membership to rule on our disenrollment cases.

So how did we get due process if it wasn't fair and impartial?

2. The disenrollment procedures, which by the way didn't even exist as a part of tribal law when we were disenrolled in 2006 because it was illegal to disenroll anyone after the 2005 law outlawing disenrollment, still were not even followed because the specfic reasons we were being disenrolled for were not presented to us until the Record of Decision informing us we were disenrolled a violation of steps 4 and 5 of the disenrollment procedures.

All we were told in the letter informing us we were being disenrolled and at the hearing with the enrollment committee was the committee had some questions about out lineal descent from the 1800s and early 1900's, we also were given a list of certified or notarized documents to turn in to the committee, and we were given some letters and statements from the CPP faction of the tribe that amounted to hearsay and which were refuted by other statements from both current tribal elders not from the CPP and elders from the historical period from the late 1800s in probate and other testimony as well as the report commissioned by the enrollment committee itself on the ancestry of the Hunter family by reknowned expert on the ancestry of Mission Indians Dr. John Johnson.

Don't you think our anonymous tribal hack critic is going to look stupid when he again repeats his nonsense after I have answered his lines for about the millonth time?

'aamokat said...

Our anonymous critic will say again, "the disenrolled lost their tribal membership because the facts were not on their side and the tribe was simply correcting an error in the membership rolls.

They went through established procedures that afforded them a simple due process."

1. We didn't get due process in anyway, shape, or form because the tribal council and the enrollment committee allowed close relatives of people who submitted and/or signed statements against our tribal membership to rule on our disenrollment cases.

So how did we get due process if it wasn't fair and impartial?

Which is a violation of the equal protection clause of the Temecula Band's, sometimes referred to as the Pechanga Band, constitution and bylaws under Article V which forbids malice or predujice against individual tribal members.

2. The disenrollment procedures, which by the way didn't even exist as a part of tribal law when we were disenrolled in 2006 because it was illegal to disenroll anyone after the 2005 law outlawing disenrollment, still were not even followed because the specfic reasons we were being disenrolled for were not presented to us until the Record of Decision informing us we were disenrolled a violation of steps 4 and 5 of the disenrollment procedures.

All we were told in the letter informing us we were being disenrolled and at the hearing with the enrollment committee was the committee had some questions about out lineal descent from the 1800s and early 1900's, we also were given a list of certified or notarized documents to turn in to the committee, and we were given some letters and statements from the CPP faction of the tribe that amounted to hearsay and which were refuted by other statements from both current tribal elders not from the CPP and elders from the historical period from the late 1800s in probate and other testimony as well as the report commissioned by the enrollment committee itself on the ancestry of the Hunter family by reknowned expert on the ancestry of Mission Indians Dr. John Johnson.

Don't you think our anonymous tribal hack critic is going to look stupid when he again repeats his nonsense after I have answered his lines for about the millonth time?

I posted this information again because I wanted to add the part about the constitution and bylaw violation.

O Pechanga said...

I'm being corrected that it was Sam ERVIN, not Rayburn.

Anonymous said...

Heads will roll and the disenrolling Tribes will be held responsible and will have to answer to the rest of Indian Country if this gets any juice. Santa Clara Pueblo vs Martinez is a huge and much needed law. If it is fractured due to the disenrolling tribes lack of respect and abuse of this law, I believe all Native Americans should place the blame smack dab on Pechanga and the other disrespectful Tribes and support the world in teminating their federal recognition!!!Why should the rest of Indian Country have to pay for a few dysfunctional criminal factions in Indian Country.

Anonymous said...

"Santa Clara Pueblo vs Martinez is a huge and much needed law."

Santa Clara Pueblo case law is going to be the corner stone. What people need to understand is that this case confirmed a tribe’s right to determine membership under their custom and tradition. In the case of Pechanga, they have broken tribal laws and not followed custom and tradition by disenrolling entire families. The simple fact that they do not know their tribal history and had to hire an Anthropologist is an interesting fact. Not everyone in the tribe is held to the same standards is another interesting fact.
Pechanga Reservation is held in trust by the Dept. of Interior for the Band. Disenrolling entire families and cutting them off of the tribal rolls needs to be investigated. The lack of internal avenues for disenrolled members to be heard is a violation of their rights. Congress needs to address ICRA.