Indian casino sues to stop police searches of its records, loses in Supreme Court

Story below

Ginsberg and the rest just took the easy way out with a technical ruling. In my humble, but most accurate opinion, the ruling was definitely anti-indian, just as the American Government has been anti-indian from the beginning. In reality, we should give the whole country back to them and beg their forgiveness. We stole their land and committed uncountable atrocities against them. God help us all.

Don't mean to start an argument, but Ive heard that the atrocities went both ways- that whites and Natives both committed terrible atrocities against each other, and it's not quite as one sided (all the whites kill all the indians) as the textbooks may have us believe. Havent studied this much, but found this to be an interesting perspective.......

and when many of these atrocities were occuring my ancestors were quite busy being oppressed elsewhere in the world, thank you. North America is largely populated by immigrants who fled here from problems elsewhere. Those that beleive that the "white man" owes anything to the decendents of long dead victims are racist, pure and simple.

That being said, this should be moved to non gambling but there is no free non gambling forum anymore so I guess it must stay here.

Hip Hop

Standing to sue is a threshold requirement of any lawsuit. The USSC simply said the tribe is a not a "person" as contemplated by the statute under which relief was sought. For the USSC to ignore this requirement would be setting a very bad precedent, which breeds bad law. The tribe can (and no doubt will) find another way to raise the issue.

When did God give the land of America to the Indians? They only possessed what they had when European Whites took it from them because they were militarily stronger and wrested it from other weaker tribes. Then the United States Government took it from them because it was stronger.

Its like Mexicans stating they should have the Southwest back because it rightly belonged to them. Bull. They only had to it to lose because they(The Mexicans) conquered it from the various tribes inhabiting it at the time.

Good ruling.

responsible for the actions of my government. I feel that same responsibility even when I oppose my government's action. I appreciate your opinion. I often vacilate on the idea of whether current governments have a duty to rectify sins of the past, i.e., the Germans paying restitution to victims of the holocost. As you rightly pointed out - you personally didn't commit any of the atrocities, nor did I. Why should we be held responsible? To use an analogy, suppose you found out that your grandfather fraudulently took possesion of the land that was subsequently willed to you and that you presently occupy. Would you feel an obligation to the heirs of the family that the land originally belonged to? On the one hand, neither you nor the original heirs were a party to the transaction. On the other hand, they should rightfully be in possesion of the land. Most people would take the position that what's done is done and hang on to the land. To be perfectly frank, the other night, when I posted my position on the subject, I had a few beers too many and was feeling indignant about the plight of the indians. (Note to self: Posting on the BJ21 board after drinking is about as stupid as trying to count cards after drinking) Now that I am cold sober and thinking about the impracticalities of the situation, I don't feel as strongly about it. I still feel badly about the situation, but realize there is not much any of us can do, nor that we are obligated to do. As for 99% pen's observation about atrocities going both ways, I believe that is true. I have read some accounts of indian on indian atrocities that were commited and they seem credible. No one, or race of people, is perfect. As for Adhoc's interpretation of the ruling - once again, in the cold sober light of day - I think he is probably correct. The Supremes did what they had to do given the posture of the case. All that having been said, this will be my last post on this subject, except possibly in the non-gambling area, but since there are non-GC members who feel strongly about this controversy that I stirred up, I am posting this response here.

John D. Kirby, a San Diego lawyer who represents Inyo, called the court ruling a "significant victory." The county dismissed the welfare fraud case against the casino employees because it could not obtain the documents it needed, Kirby said.

The investigation is continuing, he said.

So, the county suspects some welfare fraud is occuring where the casino is paying employees money the employee is not claiming on welfare paperwork. So, they get a warrant and get the records to prove the case. Then, they say they can't obtain the documents needed to prosecute the suspects. But they won the case that they could not be sued for civil rights violation during the search. Nobody claimed an illegal search nor is there any indication the county could not use the records it took with bolt cutters. The investigation continues.

I bet 10 units the county never makes this case. Those that assume the individuals investigated are guilty should be falsely accused of a serious crime by the Feds.

As for the Supreme Court ruling that the tribe is not a person who can sue, duh!

Empires rise and fall. Land and people are conquered. It's a common occurance (maybe not as much nowdays). It might not be fair, but it's something humans do very well.

Lfe isn't meant to be peaches and cream. It's not meant to be fair. People have got to realise this.