December 19, 2016 By Samantha Beckett”
is an astonishing piece of a deplorable lack of journalist curiosity regarding U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” since The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924! That single Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, made moot all previous common law-state and federal-including Presidential Executive Orders, Commerce Clause and Treaty Clause alleged Indian Treaties (if any U.S. Senate confirmed Indian treaties actually existed pre-1924 Citizenship) regarding U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” so often touted by politicians and Indian advocates as being legitimate law. Sadly, this federal judge adjudicated an issue turning on Title 25-INDIANS, a federal common law that is an un-ratified “IERS” and does not exist. This federal judge did not do due-diligence in first determining whether the common law at issue regarding federal Indian enactments was ratified by 1/3rd of the voters of the United States to amend the Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./State citizens distinguishable because of their “Indian
ancestry/race” thus adjudicating a court dispute turning on federal common law that does not exist. This judge’s actions are common place in both state and federal courts…judicial willful blindness to the fact a dispute at the bar turns on common law-state or federal-that does not exist. Presuming it does exist cannot be found in the Constitution…the enactment is or is not in compliance with United States Constitution Standards.
And yet, MSM continue to perpetuate willful blindness to the Constitutional absurdity that Congress, Presidents/Governors, Initiatives and Referendums can make distinguishable the metes and boundaries of a select group of U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” post citizenship.
The Constitution makes for no provisions for:
1.
Indian sovereign nations. None of the asserted tribes possess any of
the attributes of being a ‘sovereign
nation:’
a. No Constitution recognition
b. No international recognition
c. No fixed borders
d. No military
e. No currency
f. No postal system
2.
Treaties with its own constituency
3.
Indian reservations whereby a select group of U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” reside exclusively and to the exclusion of all others, on land-with rare exception-that is owned by the People of the United States according to federal documents readily available on-line that notes rights of ‘occupancy and use’ by these distinguished U.S./State citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” only with the land owned by the
People of the United States.
4.
Recognition of ‘Indian citizenship’ asserted by various tribes. There is no international recognition of “Indian citizenship” as there is no ‘nation’ from which citizenship is derived.
A simple question for politicians and MSM to answer…a question so simple, it is hard:
“Where is the proclamation ratified by 1/3rd of the voters of the United States that amends the Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./State citizens distinguishable because of their “Indian ancestry/race?”
]]>