Santa Clara Pueblo vs. Martinez: Can Divergent Opinions Be Correct? Is The Decision only a Shield ..or..a Weapon?

I'm fortunate to be involved in a lot of email conversations.  Because on of ours went out to a large group, I got a couple of responses and I'd like you to see them.  As ALWAYS...my comment section is open.  Thank you to BOTH.

Here's the first, from a responder from the American Indian Resource Center of the County of Los Angeles Public Library

Santa Clara Pueblo vs. Martinez (1978) - the Supreme Court essentially ruled that tribal membership does NOT come under Federal Jurisdiction - ONLY the official tribal government has ultimate authority.  Legal challenges to that decision over the last 39 years have failed .  

Theoretically it is possible to over-rule that decision but it would take a major very public concerted public effort, like with DAPL, for the feds to even consider examining it.  (OP:  ARE we UP to this challenge?)

IMO as with many American Indian issues, the feds think they've already done their part, they avoid such issues as much as possible, and just let the tribes deal with it.

This of course, triggers a response from one of our friends/family from PALA.  It's lengthy and will continue after the jump: