Tuesday, December 13, 2011

UPDATES: Native America Calling to Discuss Tribal Disenrollment: Wed. Dec. 14th Listen Live UPDATE: Show Cancelled!

UPDATE II:  Heard back from Will Kie, associate producer for Native America Calling on what happened to the show:  We had a power failure in the area of our studio on Monday and that outage may have damaged some of our equipment. So when we started the show on Tuesday, we found out that we could not take any calls from our listeners, which this being a caller driven show, would not work too well. We want our listeners to be able to join in on this and all conversations we on our show, we did not want to have this show and NOT have any caller expressing thier views. We're working to get the problem resolved and have rescheduled the show for Dec. 22, 2011.


Set your dates for December 22.

UPDATE: The show has been cancelled, we are waiting to hear back from NAC as to when they will reschedule.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011 – Disenrollment Dividing Tribes:

The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees American citizens the right to freedom of speech. Seven members of a California tribe were banned from tribal lands for up to 10 years, allegedly for speaking out against the current tribal administration. Should a tribe be able to use its status as a sovereign nation to remove unwanted members from their tribal rolls? Does simply speaking out against your tribal leaders give them the right to kick you out of the tribe? Guests include former chairwoman Jessica Tavares (United Auburn Indian Community).

To participate call: 1-800-996-2848, that's 1-800-99-NATIVE

As one of our followers said:

We need to push for “field hearings” on the problem of unjustified disenrollments such as at Pala. A wholly illegal disenrollment of a person or family must not be protected from federal court review because of Santa Clara v. Martinez.

Disenrollments at Pala were executed against 8 members who did absolutely nothing but they were singled out by Robert Smith because they were simply family members of King Freeman who was asking questions on why the millions of dollars of gaming revenues walking out the door are not accounted for.

Smith is using disenrollments as a terror tactic to silence what he feels is his herd of lambs while he spends millions who knows where and he and his family fly around on one of his private jets. “Silence of the Lambs” with Robert Smith as Hannibal Lechter. This is mean and vicious and Congress must get off their asses and hold hearings on this problem before someone takes matters into their own hands out of frustration. We must push for amendment to the Indian Civil Rights Act to authorize federal court jurisdiction to review the tribal record for Due Process/Fairness.

PLEASE JOIN IN ON THE COVERSATION listen online at Native America Calling


Anonymous said...

The Santa Clara vs. Martinez case asked the Government to change the Constitution and or bylaws. It involved the issue of if a male descendant of that tribe married outside the tribe his descendants could be enrolled but if a female married outside the tribe her descendants could not be enrolled. The case was based on discrimination and wanted the government to change their constitution and or bylaws. Now how many of these disenrolled people are asking to change their tribe’s constitution and or bylaws. If anything there asking too enforce there constitution and or bylaws and show how there disenrollment follows there constitution and or bylaws.

White Buffalo said...

Anonymous said

“If anything there asking too enforce there constitution and or bylaws and show how there disenrollment follows there constitution and or bylaws”

This is exactly true with our case. We know that we provided all information that was asked for in the form of blue ribbon documentation along with a history of our lineal decent. Although we provided this information in two binders it is my opinion that the enrollment committee did not even read it. We also asked that several members who had initiated our disenrollment be recused on the grounds of a lack of impartiality as is our right to ask according to the tribe’s constitution. This request fell on deaf ears. The same thing happened during our appeal. I have mentioned before that Judge Fields did rule in our favor in that we had substantive merit in our motion and that a hearing of evidence should go forward, but as you know we lost all subsequent appeals because of the improper use of the Martinez case. Essentially Sovereignty trumps civil rights. What is most frustrating is that congress could change this by giving the Indian Civil Rights Act teeth that would force such issues in to a neutral federal court, but because we are now not from a recognized tribe we have no voice individually. This is why our collective effort is so vital to our fight.

Anonymous said...

yes everyone should be a part of native voices if and when it is broadcasted