MNN October 26, 2005. On October 11th, 2005, we found out that our question on constitutional jurisdiction was ?denied? by the United States Supreme Court. The Judicial Conference decided not to send it up to the justices for consideration. The only answer they could have given to our question about whether Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 is still in the U.S. Constitution would have been ?yes?. This Article points out that they can only deal with Indigenous nations on a constitution-to-constitution basis.
We’re proud of our accomplishments. We felt it was the right decision. We know for sure that the United States is ?hell bent? on continuing the genocide of the Indigenous people, at least of those who refuse to knuckle under.
We confirmed that the law of the North American courts is the law of coercion and force. The Kaianereh?ko:was/Great Law is the law of consent. There has been no conquest of us and no consent by us for them to force their jurisdiction on us.
The constitutions of our people and that of the United States do exist. They have not been amended. We thought we could get the court to say, ?Well, yes, we do have a constitution-to-constitution relationship with you Rotinoshon?non:we/Iroquois?. In effect they said, ?But we don?t want to publicly acknowledge that you never gave up your sovereignty or surrendered any of your land. It would be unspeakable! It would turn the world upside down! We can?t have that! It?s mind boggling!?
Justice Clarence Thomas of the Supreme Court in his concurring opinion on April 19, 2004 in USA v. Lara and our work has now confirmed the original and authoritative precedent on the constitutional
When the court refused to address our case No. 05-165, this showed that the United States does not want to follow the rule of law. The Court knows Thomas was right and the constitutional jurisdiction issue will continue to ?haunt? until it is addressed. In other words, we killed ?colonialism? and ?federal Indian law? in Kaianereh?ko:wa territory.
Why did we do this? To reaffirmed our position. Said one member of our group who worked on this, ?Whether you acknowledge it or not, USA, this is our land. We are continuing to claim what is ours. Don?t forget that! We don?t need you to rule in our favor, to validate us, to win anything from you. We know who we are! You know who we are! We put the issues of jurisdiction and genocide in your face. We?re watching you. We always will. We?ll never go away. No matter what you think, you have to deal with us. We have lineage that predates colonial contact. You can?t block us. We are the grandparents of this land. So there!? (Ain?t that the truth!)
In the meantime, we have been successfully asserting our jurisdiction. We consistently informed New York State courts they did not have any jurisdiction to deal with us in their fraudulent attempt to settle Indian land claims. Consequently, they all crashed. Remember, New York State is our land. Otherwise, why are they always trying to settle their claims to our land?
We constitutional Indigenous people have been notifying our point man, the U.S. President, to stop any development on our land. We have been sending disclaimers to him about such mega projects as the New York Power Authority who want to build a power station, and to the Army Corp of Engineers who want to expand the St. Lawrence Seaway. We told him to make them stop their work immediately. We never surrendered
We also evicted a non-Indian from Akwesasne in full view of all U.S. Homeland Security forces. They were informed ahead of the action and stood by and watched the whole operation.
Resolution of the issue cannot come from their courts. We left our paper work throughout their judicial system. We discouraged them from using their courts to commit genocide. This was their main route in the past. They will continue to try to apply the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and New York State Constitution to set up casinos. But they will always be worried about being hit with a jurisdictional suggestion asking them how they got
There is a stalemate. The federal government will try to use unconstitutional legislation. Or they will make ?contracts?, which will be illegal too.
We have exhausted all domestic remedies. This is a pre-condition before going into the universal jurisdiction. Some have suggested we should put the issue into the international realm. Basically, it boils down to requiring the other constitutional courts in the world to alert the constitutional courts of Canada and the U.S. that they must follow their constitutional law to stop committing Indigenous genocide. They have to address their constitutions and deal with us on a nation-to-nation basis.
We have the Kaianereh?ko:wa/Great Law as the governing constitution. It is now time to decide whether to bring it to a resolution according to the Great Law in the international arena. We continue to be united.