MAPPING THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY (podcast)

My takeaway from this excellent podcast: The Supreme Court just makes up rules ... and it has all along...and IT'S CRAZY! And it's been going on since the invention of the DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY. - Trace, Blog Editor

MAPPING THE DOCTRINE OF DISCOVERY: Johnson v. McIntosh and Federal Anti-Indian Law with Peter d’Errico

The goal of this Podcast is to help identify these systems of domination that have been sustained by greed and power, through the subjugation of human beings and the natural world.  

Philip P. Arnold and Sandra Bigtree, “S02E03 - Johnson v M’intosh and Federal Anti-Indian Law with Peter d’Errico,” Mapping the Doctrine of Discovery (Podcast), July 13, 2023. https://podcast.doctrineofdiscovery.org/season2/episode-03/.

⤓ Download a transcript of the Episode as a PDF // LISTEN

What Happens Now? What about the victims of the Doctrine of Discovery?

Tamara Baldhead Pearl is cautiously optimistic the Vatican's repudiation of The Doctrine of Discovery can lead to change in what she refers to as "white supremacy in Canadian case law."

"The greater the consensus that the Doctrine of Discovery is fundamentally racist and immoral, the harder it is for Canadian courts to continue to decide cases based on this fundamental doctrine," said Pearl, who is from One Arrow First Nation, in an interview with Day 6.

(left) Tamara Baldhead Pearl, an assistant professor of law at the University of Alberta, is cautiously optimistic after the Vatican's repudiation of The Doctrine of Discovery. (University of Alberta)

Pearl, who's also an assistant law professor at the University of Alberta, says she hopes there will be increased pressure to "try to rethink how Canadian law can be brought into conformity with the contemporary understanding of Indigenous rights and equality among peoples."

The Doctrine of Discovery is a set of colonial-era theories, backed by 15th-century papal bulls, which was used to legitimize the seizure of Indigenous lands by colonial powers. Legal decisions in both the U.S. and Canada invoked the doctrine in some form.

The Vatican says in its statement the doctrine was not a Catholic teaching and had been manipulated for political purposes by colonial powers.

"The Church's magisterium upholds the respect due to every human being," the statement reaffirmed.

There have been calls to repudiate the doctrine for decades, but they gained more visibility in Canada during Pope Francis' visit last summer. Two women held a banner reading "Rescind the Doctrine" at the altar of the National Shrine of Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré on July 29, 2022. They were escorted from the basilica without incident, but draped the banner outside as part of a protest.

Sarain Fox, right, and Chelsea Brunelle of the Batchewana First Nation demonstrate outside the mass presided over by Pope Francis at the National Shrine of Saint Anne de Beaupre, Thursday, July 28, 2022, in Saint Anne de Beaupre, Quebec. (John Locher/The Associated Press)

During the visit, Pope Francis apologized to Indigenous people for the residential school system that forcibly removed Indigenous children from their homes. However, he was criticized by some for not taking the opportunity to repudiate the doctrine.

KEEP READING 

• Indigenous experts, leaders say Vatican's Doctrine of Discovery rejection marks step forward 

• Vatican's disavowal of Doctrine of Discovery a good step but 'fundamental change' still needed: Manitoba elder 
•  Indigenous leaders hope Vatican's repudiation of oppressive colonial concepts leads to real change
  

Native America Calling: Vatican rejects Doctrine of Discovery

 

The Vatican’s recent repudiation of the Doctrine of Discovery has been described as a “major step” by some Indigenous leaders, but for others, the Holy See has a long way to go before it can heal the centuries of pain caused by the doctrine’s colonization and control. Today on Native America Calling, we speak with Steve Newcomb (Shawnee and Lenape), author of Pagans in the Promised Land: Decoding the Doctrine of Christian Discovery and cofounder and director of the Indigenous Law Institute, and Bruce McIvor (Métis), lawyer and partner at First Peoples Law.

 I call it the international law of colonization, because Europeans use this law to colonize Oceania, the New World and Africa as late as the 1880s.

Mixed feelings for Vatican rescinding 'law of colonization'

By Miles Morrisseau
‘This is only a first step in correcting some of the wrongs in history’ ... 

“Native people went to the UN to talk to church leaders in the 70s to repudiate these papal bulls, which is an order from the church from the 1400s. The church claimed that they had done away with those bulls and 1539 in a papal bull that said Indians were human beings,” Miller said. “Well, that's not the way the European countries of the world took it. And this law developed and as you said, the United States 200 years ago this year, in the case of Johnson v. M'Intosh, Chief Justice John Marshall, in the first American Indian law case in the Supreme Court, adopted the Doctrine of Discovery and applied it to Indian rights here.”

continue reading

[AP Photo/Gregorio Borgia, file]

👉Johnson v. M’Intosh: 200 years of legal misery for Native people By Renae Ditmer The landmark 1823 Supreme Court case set a precedent that has undermined tribal sovereignty ever since ... continue reading

[AP Photo/John Locher]

The Doctrine of Discovery repudiated

By ICT Newscast with Aliyah Chavez
We meet the author behind the book aiming to support young women called 'Sisterhood.' A short film explores the legacy of the Rapid City boarding schools. The Vatican has repudiated the Doctrine of Discovery. We discuss its influence on tribal sovereignty ...  The Vatican officially repudiated the Doctrine of Discovery on Thursday morning. This comes after Indigenous peoples across the world demanded this action. The Doctrine of Discovery originated in the late 1400s, as justification by the Catholic Church to seize lands that were not inhabited by Christians. continue reading

 

The Pope seems to not know about the Doctrine, according to a twitter Native.

Doctrine of Discovery rescinded?

Editor Note: Colonization and genocide cannot be erased with a press release.

March 30, 2023 (National Native News)

The Vatican has formally repudiated the “Doctrine of Discovery,” which justified colonization and the taking of Indigenous lands.

Two Vatican departments issued a joint statement Thursday saying it’s not part of teachings of the Catholic Church.

Indigenous people have long called for the church to rescind the legal concept.

Joint Statement of the Dicasteries for Culture and Education and for Promoting Integral Human Development on the “Doctrine of Discovery”, 30.03.2023

1. In fidelity to the mandate received from Christ, the Catholic Church strives to promote universal fraternity and respect for the dignity of every human being.

2. For this reason, in the course of history the Popes have condemned acts of violence, oppression, social injustice and slavery, including those committed against indigenous peoples. There have also been numerous examples of bishops, priests, women and men religious and lay faithful who gave their lives in defense of the dignity of those peoples.

3. At the same time, respect for the facts of history demands an acknowledgement of the human weakness and failings of Christ’s disciples in every generation. Many Christians have committed evil acts against indigenous peoples for which recent Popes have asked forgiveness on numerous occasions.

4. In our own day, a renewed dialogue with indigenous peoples, especially with those who profess the Catholic Faith, has helped the Church to understand better their values and cultures. With their help, the Church has acquired a greater awareness of their sufferings, past and present, due to the expropriation of their lands, which they consider a sacred gift from God and their ancestors, as well as the policies of forced assimilation, promoted by the governmental authorities of the time, intended to eliminate their indigenous cultures. As Pope Francis has emphasized, their sufferings constitute a powerful summons to abandon the colonizing mentality and to walk with them side by side, in mutual respect and dialogue, recognizing the rights and cultural values of all individuals and peoples. In this regard, the Church is committed to accompany indigenous peoples and to foster efforts aimed at promoting reconciliation and healing.

5. It is in this context of listening to indigenous peoples that the Church has heard the importance of addressing the concept referred to as the “doctrine of discovery.” The legal concept of “discovery” was debated by colonial powers from the sixteenth century onward and found particular expression in the nineteenth century jurisprudence of courts in several countries, according to which the discovery of lands by settlers granted an exclusive right to extinguish, either by purchase or conquest, the title to or possession of those lands by indigenous peoples. Certain scholars have argued that the basis of the aforementioned “doctrine” is to be found in several papal documents, such as the Bulls Dum Diversas (1452), Romanus Pontifex (1455) and Inter Caetera (1493).

6. The “doctrine of discovery” is not part of the teaching of the Catholic Church. Historical research clearly demonstrates that the papal documents in question, written in a specific historical period and linked to political questions, have never been considered expressions of the Catholic faith. At the same time, the Church acknowledges that these papal bulls did not adequately reflect the equal dignity and rights of indigenous peoples. The Church is also aware that the contents of these documents were manipulated for political purposes by competing colonial powers in order to justify immoral acts against indigenous peoples that were carried out, at times, without opposition from ecclesiastical authorities. It is only just to recognize these errors, acknowledge the terrible effects of the assimilation policies and the pain experienced by indigenous peoples, and ask for pardon. Furthermore, Pope Francis has urged: “Never again can the Christian community allow itself to be infected by the idea that one culture is superior to others, or that it is legitimate to employ ways of coercing others.”

7. In no uncertain terms, the Church’s magisterium upholds the respect due to every human being. The Catholic Church therefore repudiates those concepts that fail to recognize the inherent human rights of indigenous peoples, including what has become known as the legal and political “doctrine of discovery”.

8. Numerous and repeated statements by the Church and the Popes uphold the rights of indigenous peoples. For example, in the 1537 Bull Sublimis Deus, Pope Paul III wrote, “We define and declare [ ... ] that [, .. ] the said Indians and all other people who may later be discovered by Christians, are by no means to be deprived of their liberty or the possession of their property, even though they be outside the Christian faith; and that they may and should, freely and legitimately, enjoy their liberty and possession of their property; nor should they be in any way enslaved; should the contrary happen, it shall be null and have no effect”.

9. More recently, the Church’s solidarity with indigenous peoples has given rise to the Holy See’s strong support for the principles contained in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. The implementation of those principles would improve the living conditions and help protect the rights of indigenous peoples as well as facilitate their development in a way that respects their identity, language and culture.

: FMI :

George L. Williams (2004). Papal Genealogy: The Families And Descendants Of The Popes. McFarland. pp. 74–. ISBN 978-0-7864-2071-1. 

+++

ALSO READ: Tribal membership vs. sovereign citizenship

“The ‘enrollment’ process was started by the Feds so they could use ‘blood quantum’ to finish the Genocide of Native Americans. Now we are finishing the job ourselves by continuing to use it as a ‘membership’ requirement. Membership: like the Elks Club or Lions Club or the Moose Lodge. Sad.”

—Harold Monteau, former chair of National Indian Gaming Commission and a citizen of the Chippewa Cree Tribe, today on social media

Indigenous leaders call on King Charles III to renounce Doctrine of Discovery

 

Alexandra Mae Jones | September 11, 2022

For many Indigenous people across Canada, the death of Queen Elizabeth II isn’t an occasion to mourn, but a chance to re-examine the monarchy’s legacy of subjugation as colonizers, with leaders calling on the new King to denounce the Doctrine of Discovery.

Queen Elizabeth II, the U.K.’s longest serving monarch, passed away at the age of 96 on Thursday, sparking off official mourning periods in both the U.K. and Canada.

But reflecting on her 70 year legacy can bring up painful memories and anger for those who had their land and culture stolen from them in the name of the Crown.

KEEP READING **

Related Stories

• 'I cannot mourn': Former colonies conflicted over the queen
• The Queen's death raises an important question about the Koh-i-Noor diamond, experts say
• The Queen, the future of the monarchy and how The Queen’s death affects the Commonwealth
• Australia's PM says referendum on republic not his priority
• Stepping up: Next generation of royals to see more scrutiny

  Indigenous Leader Reflects on Monarchy’s Colonial Legacy

  tomtidgewell

  

  For many Indigenous peoples across Canada, the death of Queen Elizabeth II was not an occasion to mourn, but an opportunity to re-examine the colonial monarchy’s legacy of conquest, and leaders encouraged the new king to share the doctrines of discovery. 

  READ
  

   

What the hell is a Papal Bull?

 

What you should know: Doctrine of Discovery

Nederlands: Paus Nicolas V oil on panel 1612-1616 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Volume 2, Issue #11, American Logo newsletter by Bill Annett

We are not descended from men who kept silent.  -Edward R. Murrow

 

Ask an average American (or Canadian): “What is the Doctrine of Discovery?” You’re likely to get a blank stare, an uncomfortable pause, the changing of the conversation to politics or rock stars, or perhaps the stuttered response: “You mean like Dr. Oz?”

And yet the DoD, as it is referred to by academics, unsuccessful politicians, native people and others on the receiving end, is a basic legal assumption, born of Holy Writ and therefore both sanctified and legal, 500 years ago, when the sun rotated around the European world and the earth was flat. Was it just a naïve part of that past, that ignorant and illiterate peasant flotsam of Western Europe, and now long forgotten?

Hell, no. That incredible, inhuman law, mindset and modus operandiis still alive and well, solidly embedded in the ubiquitous practice of governing law.  And where? Today, it dominates, subtly but pervasively as a daily fact of life, over 1.5 million people in Canada, three million in the U.S., six million in Mexico and a massive population in the rest of the Hemisphere, as well as in Australia, New Zealand and large swatches of Southeast Asia and Oceania.  Perhaps 400 million people in total, more than the entire U.S. population.

What is it and how did it get its start?

Pope Nicholas V, on the 18th of June, 1452, stamped his bulla, or papal seal, on the bottom of a document, a papal bull known as Dum Diversas. Dumb indeed, but with enormous ramifications.

Actually, Pope Nicholas V was a builder, and like Hitler’s autobahns in  the Thirties, he repaired infrastructure such as aqueducts destroyed during the collapse of the Roman Empire. That construction, as a matter of  fact, was analogous to the Roman Church’s succeeding the Roman Empire as the confluence and tributary conveying the brutality of empire masquerading as civility and Christian humanism.

But Nicholas is best remembered for his political balancing act between the Portuguese king and the threat of the Ottoman Empire.  One element was the papal bull Dum Diversas, which granted Portugal  “full and free power”:

 to invade, search out, capture, and subjugate the Saracens and pagans and any other unbelievers and enemies of Christ wherever they may be… and to reduce their persons into perpetual slavery.

A follow-up document, Romanus Pontifex, allowed that same empire to seize for itself the lands of any non-Christians they encountered. The Doctrine of Discovery was established.

After Columbus’s “discovered”  the New World, (although indigenous people had practised Occupy Turtle Island for some 10,000 years) Pope Alexander VI in 1493 issued another bit of papal bull known as Inter Caetera, commanding Spain

“to instruct the aforesaid inhabitants and residents and dwellers therein in the Catholic faith, and train them in good morals…”

opening the way for Catholic missions to conquer everything and anybody in the new world, except for the newly arrived Portuguese.

England quickly got into the act four years later, when King Henry VII granted John Cabot rights to possess all lands in the New World not already claimed by Portugal and Spain. In return, John Cabot, like an obedient Mafia soldier, wet the beak of his king with 20% of the total take.  All of which not only legitimized but commanded the enslavement, pillaging and killing of millions of indigenous peoples all over the world. The toll (as we palefaces like to journalize) so far for the Western Hemisphere alone totals around 100 million people.  According to one academic, (Anthony Hall of the University of Lethbridge) “the greatest re-engineering of a civilization in history.”

Does the DoD still live?  One early Supreme Court case, Johnson v. M’Intosh in 1823, according to Robert Miller,* resolved a tribal land dispute, ruling that Native American land is inalienable. They cited the Doctrine of Discovery, which stated that Christian Europeans owned all land explored and claimed, and in any event, only the federal government could buy land occupied by Native Americans, meaning that the federal government could therefore pretty much name its own price.

Supreme Court cases as recent as 1973 and 1990 have used the Doctrine of Discovery to delimit native rights to prosecute any individuals on their lands for crimes. In 2005, certain tribes were denied sovereignty and the ability to repurchase traditional land previously held.

“Apparently, Euro-Americans possessed the only valid religions, civilizations, governments, laws, and cultures, and Providence intended these people and their institutions to dominate the North American continent. The human, governmental, and property rights of Native Americans were almost totally disregarded as Discovery and then Manifest Destiny directed the United States’ expansion. Under Manifest Destiny it was ‘clear’ that God wanted Indians to get out of the way of American progress.”

In other words, a significant part of  American political practice blindly follows the Doctrine of Discovery, that ancient tossing off of political intervention by the Roman church we all accept whether we want to or not. (It’s part of of the Holy Church’s Concordat with all civilized nations.) American acceptance of this Doctrine is a modern world atrocity that parallels a universe of conflicting opinion, often denied, pernicious in its global fact.  

Slavery, war, genocide are all facts that flow from this medieval nonsense.  It defined the treatment of the world’s indigenous people that remains today in all but the most enlightened societies.  It has even – in a minor key – warped our confusion about immigration, notably the migration of indigenous peoples in the Americas, many of whom are in constant flux (perennially fluxed) and on the move because U.S. policy vis-a-vis Latin America has delimited economic opportunity.

Professor Miller has delineated and compared the Doctrine’s effects as well as practice in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, England, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain and (of course) the United States.

*The International Law of Colonialism: A Comparative Analysis, Robett J. Miller, Lewis & Clark Law Review

This was published with permission back in 2012

What is Doctrine of Discovery?

 The Doctrine of Discovery: Its effects are still being felt, but only the Pope can rescind it

Truth and Reconciliation commissioner says it's 'a matter of time' before doctrine dies 

Bryan Eneas · CBC News · May 12

Indigenous leaders and residential school survivors in Saskatchewan called on Pope Francis to rescind the Doctrine of Discovery. The Archbishop of Canterbury, one of the highest officials in the Church of England, also recently promised to see what he could do about the doctrine. (Gregorio Borgia/The Associated Press)

When the Archbishop of Canterbury visited Saskatchewan earlier this month, those who spoke with him made him aware of the damage caused by the Doctrine of Discovery.

Many survivors tie its existence to the creation and presence of residential schools, and a commissioner of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission recently said its ripple effect is still being felt in schools today.

The commission's findings, as survivors told the archbishop during his visit, show residential school policy could be traced back to the doctrine and the papal bulls.

Chiefs and leaders who attended the archbishop's visits in James Smith Cree Nation and Prince Albert commended the promise to discuss the doctrine with the Roman Catholic Church. 

"How can we dismantle the Doctrine of Discovery in a way so it can never be  used again?" Rev. Justin Welby asked the crowd who gathered to meet him in James Smith Cree Nation.

Rev. Justin Welby visited the James Smith Cree Nation to listen to residential school survivors earlier this month. He promised to aid in dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery by engaging with local officials and with the Roman Catholic Church. (Bryan Eneas/CBC)

The doctrine and its powers

The Doctrine of Discovery's supposed power came from the Roman Catholic Church. 

Papal bulls, edicts from the pope guiding colonial powers on the treatment of Indigenous people, were issued in the 15th century. 

The bulls, which empowered Christian colonial expansion, said any land "discovered" by colonial powers could be claimed as their own.

They also stated Indigeneous people who inhabited those lands were not Christian and could be subjugated and converted to Christianity. 

Sol Sanderson, a Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations senator and former chief, says colonial powers and nations eventually formed via the doctrine would create their own policies designed to terminate the rights of Indigenous people. 

Only Pope Francis can rescind the papal bulls issued in the 15th century that gave colonial nations the power to ignore the rights of Indigenous people. (Vatican Media/Reuters)

In Canada, the termination of Indigenous rights came through the Indian Act, and policies within the act led to the creation of residential schools in Canada — a system, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission says, was designed to destroy Indigenous people's sense of cultural identity. 

Sanderson says as he sees it, historically, the Canadian government has made numerous attempts to diminish Indigenous rights, based on the ideas passed through the generations that colonial powers are better suited to govern Indigenous people, thanks to the doctrine.

But Sanderson says Indigenous people's inherent rights aren't and weren't ever superseded by the doctrine, just ignored by it.

"People don't know nothing about inherent rights … they supersede everything, but what are they, where do they come from?" Sanderson said.

"When you look at the inherent rights we have, the inherent sovereignty of our nations and inherent rights to self-determination, the inherent right to education, health, social development, lands, resources, economics, justice … that's the inherent rights we have."

Sanderson says he hoped the Archbishop of Canterbury would come to an agreement with the pope to implement a plan and put teeth into a strategy resulting in the rescinding of the doctrine.

He says such an agreement should recognize the sovereignty of Indigneous people, their natural power to govern, their natural power to make treaties and their natural power to legislate internally and externally both at home and abroad — terms he says need to be dictated by Indigenous people.

Old history, modern effects

The doctrine itself might seem like a relic of the past but retired Senator Murray Sinclair, a commissioner of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, says its effects are still very much being felt today.

There's no doubt the doctrine contributed to the creation of residential schools, Sinclair says. 

But the doctrine also allowed for and created the thinking that colonial powers could occupy Indigenous lands and territories — and in turn the thinking that Indigenous people are inferior to non-Indigenous people, particularly European settlers.

Thinking that colonial powers are superior to Indigenous people is something he says permeated the education system even beyond residential schools and is still being felt today, even if schools have taken a "softer, more gentle approach" to Canada's history.\

"They still talk about the beauty of colonialism, the beauty of European growth, the wisdom and intelligence of the leaders of Confederation, the wisdom and intelligence of the people who've been in charge of government over the years," Sinclair said. 

"It's Indigenous people who are made to look bad in the history books in this country and that not only has a negative effect on the Indigenous children, it also has a negative effect on non-Indigenous children."

He says non-Indigenous children taught in school early on to believe they're superior are potentially jeopardizing their relationship with Indigenous people. 

Sinclair says that factor is something that affected him and other Indigenous people as children and caused a deep distrust of all levels of non-Indigenous society — churches, educational systems, government and many others.

'A matter of time'

The Archbishop of Canterbury himself can't rescind the papal bulls making up the Doctrine of Discovery. 

His promise to survivors gathered in James Smith Cree Nation and Prince Albert earlier this month was to engage in discussions with the Pope about the harms he learned about the doctrine while in Saskatchewan. 

Rescinding of the document would come down to the Pope.

Murray Sinclair says he expects the Doctrine of Discovery will be rescinded in the near future. (Darin Morash/CBC)

Sinclair says that's something this generation could see in its lifetime — and it's something that needs to be done now for survivors' sake. 

"I think it's a matter of time before the Doctrine of Discovery is ruled as being an irrelevant doctrine," Sinclair said. 

He says the question of what legal basis the Crown has to justify its legal title over Indigenous people has appeared in the Supreme Court of Canada a number of times, but hasn't been properly answered. 

In reading through legal decisions, he says, he's seen justices point out the major act of reconciliation that needs to happen in Canada is reconciling Crown sovereignty and Indigenous sovereignty.

 "We're hoping that the parties can do that, but if they leave it to the courts to do that, then they may not be happy with the result," Sinclair said. 

MORE

• Low-profile apologies from Archbishop of Canterbury amounted to a missed opportunity, says former TRC chair

• Archbishop of Canterbury promises release of residential school records in England following survivors' calls

 Residential school survivor hopes Pope Francis brings more than an apology to Canada

• Indigenous student praised after altering 'European discovery of Americas' worksheet

‘The problem is we survived’

 Q&A with Dawn Martin-Hill about truth and reconciliation

The Hamilton Spectator |  Oct. 1, 2021

Dawn Martin-Hill is a Mohawk woman and the first Indigenous cultural anthropologist in Canada. She lives at Six Nations of the Grand River and is this year’s keynote speaker at the Gandhi Peace Festival on Saturday.

The topic of this year’s free virtual festival was truth and reconciliation with Indigenous communities.

Ahead of her lecture, The Spectator spoke with Martin-Hill about what she plans to discuss, her perception of the inaugural National Day for Truth and Reconciliation, and how society can move forward.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length.

What is your lecture about?

I’ll look at the Great Law of Peace that our people have had for over 1,000 years, and our Thanksgiving address, which is our most ancient acknowledgement. It’s our worldview and has everything to do with our ecosystem and our environment.

It doesn’t matter what you reconcile if we’re destroying our future existence. Greed and exploitation is going to put us all in peril, and that’s something we can all relate to, especially young people.

Also, I’ll look at how the pillaging of lands and residential schools are the latest outcome of the Doctrine of Discovery. Before that, we had millions massacred, disease killing our crops, 50 million buffalo slaughtered so we would starve. They did everything they could so we wouldn’t exist, and the problem is we survived.

What do you hope people take away from your lecture?

We all knew about those babies who were buried in unmarked graves. We knew how much the Truth and Reconciliation Commission did in their investigation, and Canada is withholding the information that should speak to Canadians in very plain terms.

Think about the ways in which you’ve maybe treated or dismissed Indigenous peoples and their claims to land, their want to protect water, missing and murdered Indigenous women, the sterilization of Indigenous women, the economic apartheid. The fact that we’re not bitter and don’t want revenge is due to the philosophy of our people, the Great Law of Peace, to always move in the direction of hope and compassion, and try to change the minds of people — you greet those people and try to heal them and their minds.

Canadians need to reconcile with their own history of this country and come to terms with it, and figure out how to create a new legacy.

By doing nothing, you are part of the problem. You can’t say “get over it.”

How do you feel about the public’s response to Truth and Reconciliation Day?

Somebody putting an “Every Child Matters” sign on their door is something that, as an Indigenous person, you not only notice, but it really does move you because those are the ones who matter.

Those neighbours matter, not the government, the Pope and the bishops. The next door neighbour in Caledonia who their kids go to school with matter. The average citizen makes up this country, and they’re the most meaningful.

How can we be a more peaceful society?

Rescind the Doctrine of Discovery. Be compassionate, provide aid and assistance to those who need it, and support human beings. Most of all, support the land. We can’t live without water, without being able to grow food, without rain, without our air being clean. When you fracture parts of the Earth, you’re fracturing yourself.

Our environment will determine whether we can have peace or not.

You can stop climate change, don’t just accept it.

To listen to Martin-Hill’s lecture, visit gpsj.humanities.mcmaster.ca/gandhi-peace-festival/.

The Global Family: Lakota Law Project

Lakotaw.org

Petition

Donate

Facebook

“Enough words, enough rhetoric, my people have been robbed with false promises for centuries. We want action. "We want money and training to build our own foster care facilities to protect our children who are sacred. We want it now.” Bryan Brewer Former President, Oglala Sioux Tribe

Thank you for walking the Red Road with us.  

Together, we are making progress, step by step.

The Lakota Peoples Law Project continues to advocate for the approval of the Title IV-E Federal Planning Grant applications that Crow Creek, Cheyenne River, Lower Brule, and Yankton have submitted by sending our most recent report, “The New Boarding Schools,” to more than 100 officials in Washington D.C.

Our hope is that the widespread corruption among all levels of South Dakota government detailed in the report will urge federal officials in the Department of Health and Human Services to fund the planning of Child and Family Planning Service Programs that are so necessary for these four tribes to retain their culture and their children.

In addition to this, we have been supporting our parent organization, the Romero Institute, in circulating a new petition calling on Pope Francis to rescind the Doctrine of Discovery.

A combination of three 15th century Papal Bulls, the doctrine granted explorers the moral and legal justification to seize land and resources from Indigenous peoples. Its effects still linger, serving as a major plank of United States property law which is oriented to continue to disenfranchise, displace, and ultimately, devastate Indigenous peoples for imperialistic economic ventures.

This is the time for Pope Francis to rescind this doctrine, especially in light of his recent encyclical, Laudato Si’, and his compelling speech in Bolivia in which he said, “I say this with regret: many grave sins were committed against peoples of America in the name of God.” He went on to say, “I humbly ask forgiveness, not only for the offenses of the Church herself, but also for the crimes committed against the native peoples during the so-called conquest of America.” His apology is the first step in respecting and honoring the innate rights of Indigenous peoples. Rescinding the Doctrine of Discovery will prove that Francis wants to begin a new era of cooperation.

Help! We need thousands of petition signatures before Pope Francis arrives in the United States in September. Please sign the Doctrine of Discovery petition and donate to our national education campaign.

We have also begun a thorough legal analysis of a series of lawsuits aimed at eliminating the Indian Child Welfare Act. A private consortium of adoption attorneys, the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys, have launched three strategic federal lawsuits challenging, not only the new proposed guidelines, but ICWA itself. 

These deceptive suits are clearly a response to the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ release of the updated guidelines for the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA),

Please watch the video to understand our response to such an unwarranted and misguided attack on ICWA. We are also working on an Amicus Curiae brief to submit to the Department of Justice, revealing the deep and unethical conflicts of interest on the part of attorneys affiliated with the American Academy of Adoption Attorneys who have filed these lawsuits to promote their own personal financial gain. For more information on this evolving story, read our press release.

 

Since our last newsletter, we have received some national press attention! Chase Iron Eyes, Chief Counsel for the Lakota People’s Law Office, was interviewed for a Mother Jones article about his work with Native Lives Matter. We published a report to support his efforts in February of this year. Truthout highlighted our efforts in their article earlier this month, depicting the atrocities committed on the part of state and federal governments in removing Indigenous children from their families and communities.

We will continue to keep you updated on our progress in returning thousands of children stolen from their families, but until then, please continue your support by following us on social media—Facebook, Tumblr, Twitter—by reading our daily blog, and by encouraging your friends and family to sign our petition to President Obama. We need to reach our goal of 100,000 signatures as soon as possible!

Please become a member of Lakota People's Law Project to be a part of our global family. Our members receive gift packages and keep us going with a small monthly commitment. We are not funded by tribes or big foundations, we depend on people just like you! Together we are making a real difference. Thank you for your friendship and support.

Wopila!

Lakota People's Law Project

Founding Fathers attitudes about Native Americans

Many of the founding fathers believed American Indians would die out within a few generations.

Founding Fathers' attitudes toward Native Americans:

From the very beginning of US history, the founding fathers believe they are at a higher stage of Adam Smith's "four stages of history" than American Indians. George Washington favors treaties over force, writing that when forced off his land, the "savage," like the wolf, always seeks to return.


Johnson v. McIntosh determined that American Indian's land title could be extinguished "by purchase or by conquest."

February 28, 1823|  In a land dispute, the Supreme Court determines that titles purchased from tribes do not supersede titles awarded by the federal government, because the indigenous occupants lost their "right of occupancy."



Chief Justice John Marshall's opinion calls American Indians "fierce savages," stating: "Discovery is the foundation of title, in European nations, and this overlooks all proprietary rights in the natives."


Even now, this "Doctrine of Discovery" continues to creep into the policies and mindset of today.


Chief Justice John Marshall composed several early and influential opinions on the relationship between American Indians and the United States.


Chief Justice John Marshall's majority opinion states that the tribe is not an independent nation, but a "domestic dependent nation" with a relationship to the United States "like that of a ward to his guardian." This ward-guardian mindset has carried into modern-day American Indian-US relations.


Congress passes the General Allotment Act, authorizing the president to divide up tribal land and parcel it out to individual American Indians. In the process, tribes are dispossessed of 90 million acres.


Meanwhile, American Indian children are forced to assimilate at mandatory boarding schools. (And Indian Adoption Programs would also begin)


Col. Richard Pratt, founder of the first off-reservation Indian Boarding School, gives a speech in 1892 where he adovcates to "kill the Indian in him, and save the man."


(Videos: UAF Tribal Management Program)

In this video, American Indian scholar and advocate Ada Deer calls the terminations a "cultural, economic and political disaster" for American Indians.
Congress terminates tribal status for more than 100 tribes in the 1950s. When tribes lose their status, their lands become subject to taxation and members lose access to federal programs and services. The government further weakens tribes by relocating American Indians from reservations to cities and expanding state jurisdiction over reservations.

TRIBAL NATIONS - The Story of Federal Indian Law
More Info: https://www.tananachiefs.org/about/our-history/


READ MORE HERE

Papal Bull declared war on Indians in 1452

"The power to commit horrible crimes against children, and others, and then absolve itself and the rapists and killers it shields within its ranks, has made the Vatican a criminal, rogue body under every international standard of law and morality."

Read about the Papal Bull and what it means to federal laws here today in the US in the article "Ending Catholicism And Related U.S. Imperialism" by Thomas Ivan Dahlheimer at http://www.towahkon.org/endofimperialism.html

Papal Bull declares the legitimacy of Christian domination over (Indian) pagans, sanctifying enslavement and expropriation of property:

Romanus Pontifex, January 8, 1455 - …We bestow suitable favors and special graces on those Catholic kings and princes, …athletes and intrepid champions of the Christian faith… to invade, search out, capture, vanquish, and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and… to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery, and to apply and appropriate… possessions, and goods, and to convert them to… their use and profit.* (European Treaties bearing on the history of the United States and its Dependencies to 1648, Editor Francis Gardiner Davenport, pages 20-26)

HISTORY: Papal Bulls are the fabric of United States and International law. Papal authority is the basis for United States power over Indigenous peoples, not generally understood. The Doctrine of Discovery is still being used as an active legal principle by the United States Supreme Court in the twentieth-first century, revealed in the case City of Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York decided in March 2005. The case involved a dispute over taxation of ancestral lands of the Oneida Indian Nation. During oral arguments, it became clear that the case would hinge on whether, in the opinion of the Court, the Oneida Indian Nation “has sovereignty status” with regard to the ancestral lands the Oneida Nation had reacquired. To decide the sovereign status of the Oneida Indian Nation, the Supreme Court relied upon the Doctrine of Discovery. Revealed in footnote number one of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsbergʼs decision for the Court majority: “Under the Doctrine of Discovery,” wrote Justice Ginsberg, “... fee title to the lands occupied by Indians when the colonists arrived became vested in the sovereign — first the discovering European nation and later the original states and the United States... The Supreme Courtʼs reference to the Doctrine of Discovery places the context for the Courtʼs decision in Sherrill v. Oneida Indian Nation of New York within the Framework of Dominance, dating back to the era of the Vatican Papal Bulls.”

Empire attitudes and dominance are not dead. ----Trace