In Cherokee freedmen case, two like-minded groups clash over tribal sovereignty

The Congressional Black Caucus and the administration should have backed off and let the tribe and the freedmen seek a legal remedy. That’s wishful thinking, of course, because the Obama administration has injected itself into race-related causes from the beginning, including state immigration and voter ID laws.

One politically connected, Democratic Party-leaning group is pitted against another in a landmark battle over race, heritage, tribal sovereignty and exclusivity.

This describes the decade-long Cherokee Nation’s “freedmen” dispute that may be headed for resolution soon in a federal district court. Liberals will have a hard time deciding whom to favor in this tussle over the Cherokees’ membership rolls.

On one side is a revered tribe that survived a catastrophic relocation to Oklahoma in the 19th century, a proud people enjoying a sovereignty that extends to hiring preferences that would be illegal for anyone else. On the other side are the descendants of slaves owned and later freed by Cherokees, blacks who were considered as tribal members until the tribe decided otherwise.

“We are at a fork in the road, and both paths lead to bad things,” said Clint Carroll, a Cherokee and professor of Indian studies at the University of Minnesota. Losing the freedman fight would be a blow to sovereignty, Carroll told The Wall Street Journal. Winning it would be a blow to racial harmony and the tribe’s image.

[…]

Complete text linked here.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *