My article was about a lawsuit against the Cherokee Indians that was turned down.
-In 2004, lawsuit from a Freedmen descendent filed against Cherokee Indians saying acts ignoring freedmen decedents from Tribal membership were unconstitutional to the Cherokee constitution.
-Freedmen: descendents from the black slaves the Cherokee owned before slavery was abolished in 1865.
-After slavery was abolished, a treaty called the Treaty of 1866 was made between the Cherokees and their former slaves saying that the Cherokee will grant citizenship into the Cherokee tribe to all now free black slaves and their descendents and they will be set aside Cherokee land and voting rights, among other things as well
-In 2004 this lawsuit was filed to the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court by a Freedmen descendent saying the Cherokee weren’t upholding their end and that they weren’t being given their citizenship
-The court ruled in favor of this then and said the Freedmen should not be denied citizenship.
-Chief of the Cherokee tribe at the time, Chief Chad Smith opposed this ruling, and proposed that the Cherokee constitution should be amended to restrict tribal membership
-In 2006 the Cherokee Tribal Council voted to make the amendment saying that only direct Cherokee descendents could be considered Cherokee citizens
-Protest was filed against this to the Cherokee Nation Supreme Court, but Judge Henry Kennedy, a district judge in Washington said that the Cherokees had a right to vote on whether or not to make the amendment.
-The final vote said that Freedmen descendents could not be considered citizens.
-This was upheld this past August, and 2,800 Freedmen descendents lost their status as Cherokee citizens, including right to food aid and medical services provided for being Cherokee.
About Cherokee:
-A part of the five civilized tribes considered to have adapted to European ways, explaining why they took up black slaves in the first place
-Seminole, Choctaw, Creek also signed treaty after slavery was abolished to make them citizens
-They faced much persecution….
-Trail of Tears, 1838, part of removal, moved from homes in southeast to what is now Oklahoma, ¼ of their population died
-put in boarding school trying to get rid of the Indian in them and have their culture stamped out.
-Put through persecution like other Indians, put on reservations, living in poverty, etc.
-Now are supposed to be their own self-determined nation, but U.S. government still shadowing over them.
What determines Cherokee:
To be Cherokee you have to have at least a certain percentage of Cherokee blood in you. They have members who are as little as 1/2048 Cherokee, but the freedmen descendents have no Cherokee blood.
Reaction to court ruling:
-Cherokee getting “bullied” for this denying Freedmen descendents Cherokee citizenship by U.S. federal government
-Freedmen requesting withdrawal of funds given to Cherokee by federal govt. that helps pay for the food distribution to more than 35,000 Cherokee households
-Causing problems for Cherokee as defining themselves as a self-determined nation that should be able to make its own decisions. They make a decision but then US govt. interferes and comments on their decisions.
-Tough spot b/c freedmen descendents are fighting for their right to be considered Cherokee and Cherokee are denying it, and Cherokee are trying to make its own decisions and independently run their people, but US govt. is butting in trying to take control of their decisions
Question: What do you think should determine whether or not you can be allowed membership to the Cherokee tribe? Do you think the freedmen descendents should be allowed to be members? Why/ why not?
I understand that the Cherokee tribe does not think the freedmen descendants should not be apart of their tribe but the slaves have been living within the tribe for years and years. In defense of the Cherokees I think only the real slaves that lived in the camp grounds with the Natives should be able to be apart of the tribe because they actually lived with them. Their children should not be or even grandchildren because they do not have anything to do with the Cherokee tribe, they do not live with them or do anything for them so they do not have any significance to the tribe besides the fact that their family members from the past were slaves to the Cherokees.
ReplyDeleteI think that people who want to be part of the Cherokee tribe and be allowed membership should at least have some Cherokee blood in them. I understand that freedmen descendents want to be part of the tribe, but if their ancestors were never really part of the tribe, I feel like the Cherokee have a point to not accept their membership. There aren’t many Native American tribes left and the Cherokee probably want to keep their tribe with real Cherokee blood to keep passing it along to future generations. Adding freedmen descendents when their ancestors weren’t really part of the tribe defeats the purpose of continuing the Cherokee blood line. Overall, I feel like freedmen descendents shouldn’t be allowed membership because they were never a part of the Cherokee tribe and the only reason that they want membership is because their ancestors were slaves to them.
ReplyDeleteI believe that to be a part of the Cherokee Tribe you must be a blood descendant of a Cherokee tribe member. I do not believe that someone without full Cherokee Tribe heritage should be denied membership as long as they are at least partially related. I do not believe the Freedmen descendants should be granted membership to the Cherokee tribe because they were not member of the tribe, yet they were slaves to them. If anything, I would think that the Freedmen descendants would avoid the Cherokee Tribe rather than desire membership to a group which oppressed their ancestors. They are of African descent not Cherokee and that is why they should not be granted membership to this tribe.
ReplyDeleteI think the rules that allow people to become U.S. citizens should be the same for becoming a member of a tribe. I don't understand why the Cherokees only allow people with Cherokee blood to join. If anyone really likes and believes in that way of life, then they should welcome those people so the tribe can grow. I think the freedman descendants should be allowed in because the Cherokees owe them some respect. The freedman were treated inhumanely by the Cherokees and the Cherokees should look back on their history, learn from it, and make things right. They should realize they were wrong and make things right by welcoming them in, not kicking them out. Also, the Cherokees didn't give a logical explanation of why they couldn't let the freedman join.
ReplyDeleteyou should definatly be part of the Cherokee tribe when you are blood related. i dont think that is fair to be denied by the membership if you are not full cherokee because a lot of the population of the cherokee has been wiped out, so i believe that it is a good idea to keep the traadition going even if you are not full cherokee. i defiantly dont believe that the freedom decendents should not be added to the membership because they were never really part of the tribe and they are not blood related.
ReplyDeleteI think that only those that have descendents or are biologically related to past Cherokee should be considered a member of the tribal Cherokees. The Cherokees are similar to a family that has lived through many generations, and is not like a country or state where you are just allowed citizenship into the family. Thus I proclaim that the Freedman descendants should not be allowed citizenship to the Cherokee tribe. Freedmen don't have any Native American heritage let alone Cherokee heritage, so granting membership into a tribal family that they don't have any relationships with would be a disrespect to the Cherokee people.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I think that in order to be allowed to me a member of the Cherokee tribe, one must have Cherokee blood within them. I feel as though it is important to be considered a member of the Cherokee tribe if a certain percent of Cherokee blood is found within them because in actuality that means that they are part Cherokee and their ancestors were apart of the tribe. I believe that the freedman descendants should not be allowed to be a member of the Cherokee tribe because they contain no Cherokee blood. On the other hand, the treaty of 1866 stated that the Cherokees will grant citizenship into the tribe for the free black slaves as well as their descendants for things such as land and voting rights. I feel as though this would only be fair if the Cherokee tribe granted them citizenship because it was a previous promise made by former Cherokee tribe members. I am torn between these choices because I understand where the members of the Cherokee tribe are coming from saying that the freedman descendants weren’t actually relatives to the Cherokee tribe members, but then again the freedman descendents were promised citizenship within the treaty of 1866. In the end, I would have to say I believe the freedman descendants shouldn’t be granted citizenship in order to keep the tradition in tact of requiring Cherokee blood within the member.
ReplyDeleteThe determining factor for allowence into the Cherokee tribe should be to have Cherokee blood in them. I'm not saying they have to be a full-blooded Cherokee, but they must have some relation to the tribe. If they have no relation to the tribe, I see no reason to grant them membership. I don't think the Freedman descendents should be allowed in for these reasons. Like it says in Maddie's summary, "... the freedman descedents have no Cherokee blood." This is the only determining factor when it comes to membership. The freedman descendents are only the descendents of slaves who the Cherokee owned. That doesn't make them Cherokee. I agree with Jeff on the fact that they should avoid this tribe due to the opression of their ancestors. I don't think they have a reason to be granted membership into the tribe. You have to at least be partially Cherokee.
ReplyDeleteI agree with just about everyone who has previously commented on this blog. I too, in my opinion, believe that in order to become a citizen, or a part, of the Cherokee tribe, a person must have to have a certain percentage of Cherokee blood within in him / her. The Cherokees believe that people should have their blood in order to be accepted into their tribe, and the freedmen descendants don't have any Cherokee blood at all. Therefore, they shouldn't be allowed into the tribe. In order to become a citizen of the Cherokee tribe, a person must have at least some Cherokee blood. They could;t be some random person with no affiliation with them at all just walking up to the chief saying that they want to become a member, out of the blue; they must have a logical explanation with a smidgen of Cherokee blood. So, basically, in order to be a part of the Cherokee tribe, you must be in some way, Cherokee-blooded and no, the freedman descendants should not be accepted in order to keep the Cherokee tradition.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion is,to be in the Cherokee tribe i think you do need to have a certain percentage of Cherokee blood. The tribe simply wants to maintain their Cherokee blood line. The freedmen decedents that want to join now are great grand children of the original freedmens at the least, some of them could be great great grandchildren, the decentdents were already only 50 percent of Chereokee blood in the first place, the freedmen decents demanding citizenship in the tribe have probably close to zero percentage of Chereokee blood in them. Therefore, I believe that in order to be in the Cherokee tribe, you must be a blood decentdent. Because this tribe simply wants to maintain there blood line.
ReplyDeleteI beleive the Cherokee tribe has jurisdiction over who is deemed Cherokee and who is not. The Cherokee tribe bases its members on who is related by blood (ancestors) and the Freedman's would not fit this description. Furthermore, though it is controversial that some members are very distantly related, the Cherokee do have control over this matter and if they do not want to let the Freedmans join; it may not be the best ethical decision but it is the decision they have decided upon. Furthermore, it is up to the Cherokee to overcome this blood line decision and accept them to their tribe, however strict their rules are. However, another controversial moment could arrise because the Federal government technically should not question the ways of the Native Americans or they will compare to previous behavior by whites in the 17-18th century. The Federal government and Freedmans can try to persuade them to allow them in the tribe but ultimately the decision lays within the Cherokee.
ReplyDeleteNative American tribes are considered nations by the U.S. government, but this does not mean that they must operate like the U.S. The tribes have never been about freedom and liberty and no-exclusion. The reason they are granted nation status is so that they may operate as they always have and so that they can govern themselves. If a tribe wants its members to be descendants only, then that should be a legal decision that they may uphold.I think that it is up to the Cherokee nation whether or not freedmen descendants are granted citizenship. I do think that the freedmen descendants had a legitimate claim and that the Cherokee nation should think about the treaties made in the past that were broken by the U.S. constantly. I think that the Cherokee are just validating the ability of a government to break whatever treaties it has made. They are invalidating the word of theirs or any government. What trust should be put in a treaty that can be broken at the command of the leaders. Therefore the freedmen should have a claim to membership. I do not believe however, that the treaty should have been made or that the freedmen should have a claim. The Cherokee did opress their ancestors and I think that those ancestors deserved membership when they were freed, but the freedmen descendants have no reason for membership other than the treaty, and the only reason they would want membership to a people that hates them is for the benefits of being part of the Cherokee nation. Therefore, seeing as the decision by the Cherokee courts and chiefs are and should be considered legal, the freedmen descendants do not deserve membership into the Cherokee nation.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Freedmans should not be able to join the Cherokee tribe. They do not have Cherokee blood in them, so therefore they should not be allowed into their tribe. They were only the slaves of them, it was their job. It's like having your boss allow you into their family without really being apart of their family. It's unnecessary and not something to fight for. Like Shayna said, the people who are trying to join now are extreme descendants of Freedmans and most definitely do not have Cherokee blood in them, so it is unfathomable of why these people are trying to be let into a tribe that does not have anything to do with them. Sure their great great great grandparents were slaves to some Cherokees, but that is it, nothing more. Their ancestors were only slaves and were not a part of the tribe, therefore they should not be let in into the tribe.
ReplyDeleteI believe that you should be able to become part of a Cherokee tribe if they are blood descendent. To me, it doesn't matter how much Cherokee blood you have in you, all that matters is that you have some Cherokee in you. Based on that, i think that freedmen should be able to join the Cherokee tribe. If they don't have real Cherokee blood in them, they shouldn't get to join their tribe. In my opinion i think people join the tribes because of the reservations laws. Back to what Liam said, they govern themselves, and i think some people would take that as an advantage. So i believe that with Cherokee blood should be the only people that are able to join their tribe.
ReplyDeleteI think you should be able to be apart of a Cherokee tribe if they are related. As vinny said, I agree that it doesn't matter how related you are as long as you have proof that you are, even the littlest bit. Therefore I think Freedman should be able to join the tribe. People wabt to do this because they want to be able to govern themselves.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the Cherokee people should be able to choose who is considered a Indian or not. The United States let them become there our nation so we should not get in there way when they want to make a choice. They let people be a part of them if they are related by blood which non of the Freedman's are, so by their definition they could not possibly be considered part of the tribe. I think we should let them decide who is a part of them and who is not.
ReplyDeleteI think that you should be able to be part of the Cherokee tribe if you are partly related, because you are still some what part of the tribe and there is not many people that are fully Cherokee. I think that Freedman should be able to be part of the tribe because he was still part Cherokee. I also think they should let them decide who is part of them or not.
ReplyDeleteI think that if you want to be a Cherokee then you must be loyal. If their is a person who is 1/2048's Cherokee there is no point to shut down anyone else. Some people might be Cherokee just as much as that person but can't follow their family tree back that far. If someone is passionate about being Cherokee and can prove they are I believe they should be allowed, and if not I consider it discrimination.
ReplyDeleteIn order to be a full fledged Cherokee you need to have a blood tie to the tribe. Being a legitiment blood descendant of the Cherokee is enough proof for you to be Cherokee. The way it works is like any other group or major family you need to be of the same blood relation to be a official member. In the case of most Cherokees they may not have full 100% Cherokee blood so a certain percent should allow them to be allowed to be in the tribe. The Cherokee tribe was a once thriving tribe but is on the verge of collapse. In this case I would allow those of a only a certain percent of Cherokee blood to be able to call themselves Cherokee.
ReplyDeleteI think that if you are blood related or are a descendent of Cherokees from the past you could be a member of the Cherokee tribe. I think that if they have a certain percentage of Cherokee blood is found in them because then, to me, that means that they are part of the Cherokee and that their ancestors were also a part of the tribe. I think that the Freedman descendants should not be allowed to be citizens in the Cherokee tribe because Freedman has no Native American heritage or specifically any Cherokee heritage at all. So if they were granted the rights into the Cherokee tribe it wouldn't be fair because they do not have any relationships with anyone who is of Cherokee blood.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, I believe that in order to be part of the Cherokee tribe, you must be blood related. If it was my decision that would be just about the only requirement. Whether you were fully blooded Cherokee or even 1/2048, I think it is important and would supply a good reason to be a member. I also agree with what Tyler said, since the United States let them become their own nation they should have the power to decide who is part of the tribe and who isn't since they are in a way independent. Since none of the Freedmen descendants have any Cherokee blood, I do not think they should be known as part of the tribe even if they would like that title. But as Tyler said, I think it should be left up to the Cherokee's to decide who is a true Cherokee tribe member and who isn't.
ReplyDeleteI think that in order to be considered part of the Cherokee tribe need to share the same type of blood with the other members of the tribe. I think it is important to the people of the tribe to truly be a blood member of their tribe. I do not think that the freedman should be considered a part of the Cherokee tribe. Although the treaty says one thing, the freeman people are not blood related to any member of the Cherokee tribe. However, i can also see why the freedman people feel the way they do, they were told they could be part of the tribe from the treaty. But my final thought on this topic is that the the blood members of the Cherokee tribe should be able to decide who can and cannot be part of the tribe.
ReplyDeleteI also think that in order to be considered a member of the Cherokee tribe, you should be required to be blood related. While I think that it was important for the actual Freedmen slaves to be included as members, there descendents do not really have any other connection to the Cherokee. The slaves lived with and were part of the tribe, however, their descendents do not have the same relationship.
ReplyDeleteI think that to be allowed into the tribe you must have some cherokee blood. It is up to the leaders of the tribe as to how much. Having a blood relative in the tribe is important because it keeps the tribe culturally the same. It also gives the tribe something that they all have in common.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, to be a member of the Cherokee tribe, As my piers have noted already, I think one must have a certain amount of blood that would allow the person to be a Cherokee. If its not the case i believe they shouldn't be allowed to be a member because it would be very disrespectful and offensive to the tribe. Furthermore, i believe the freedman decedents shouldn't be apart of the Cherokee tribe because they have no Cherokee blood with in them and don't part in with the famous tribe. They can be voted in but that would be the wrong choice.
ReplyDeleteTalked to Mrs. Vivirito and said that it being late was okay for a reason i talked about with her
In my opinion membership into a Native American tribe should not be limited. The population of Native American tribes are slowly decreasing and it would be extremely helpful to raise the population by allowing the Freedman decedents to enter the tribe. Though keeping the Native American bloodline pure is important, one would think that because these people were with the tribe a very long time ago they would be almost grandfathered in. Though they were slaves to the tribe, most would count that as part of the population. And if it counts as part of the they should then be allowed membership. When we abolished slavery, though there were many advocates for it, we did not ship the slaves back to Africa, we granted them citizenship (after a while). I think that the Cherokee tribe should learn from the horible mistake they made a long time ago and right their wrongs.
ReplyDelete(I am so sorry I did not know that you had to comment on the other bloggers post.)