Latest Oneida Court Decision

From the 32 Territory: April 3, 2004: On April 2, 2004, the three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in New York City, rendered their decision regarding the appeal filed by the 19 'dissidents' whose homes have been targeted for demolition by Ray Halbritter. <!--break--> Posted on behalf of the traditional Oneida. Greetings from the Onyota':Ka Oneida Wolf Clan of the Haudenosaunee Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy P R E S S R E L E A S E: Please Distribute Widely From the 32 Territory: April 3, 2004: On April 2, 2004, the three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in New York City, rendered their decision regarding the appeal filed by the 19 'dissidents' whose homes have been targeted for demolition by Ray Halbritter. The plaintiffs include Maisie Shenandoah, a 72-year-old Traditional Wolf Clan Mother. Other plaintiffs include Diane Schenandoah, her three children; Vicky Shenandoah-Halsey and her two children, and Danielle Schenandoah-Patterson and her three children including Jolene, age 9, and Monica Antoine-Watson and her son Kyle. In their seven-page decision, the three judges unanimously affirmed the decision by the US District Court in Syracuse that the US Courts do not have jurisdiction to enter any order protecting these women and children from the homelessness to be caused by Halbritter's so-called "housing program". The three judges did express frustration that in their opinion, the US Congress had not given them sufficient power under the Indian Civil Rights Act to do anything to help the plaintiffs. In one passage, the three Federal judges condemned the conduct and actions of Halbritter and the other defendants (including the non-Oneida prosecutor, Peter Carmen, appointed by Halbritter) against these innocent victims, even going so far as commenting that it would be a "mockery of common sense" to apply the "name of liberty" to Halbritter's reign over the Oneida Nation. The judges stated that "[e]ven though the actions of the ruling members of the Nation [Halbritter] may be partly inexcusable herein, we can only remedy wrongs which invoke the jurisdiction of this Court." The judges went even further by quoting Alexander Hamilton as saying "If [a] legislature [referring to the defendants' so-called men's council] can disfranchise any number of citizens [such as plaintiffs] at pleasure by general descriptions, it may soon confine all the votes to a small number of partisans, and establish an aristocracy or an oligarchy; if it [Halbritter] may banish at discretion all whom [Halbritter had] render[ed] obnoxious without hearing or trial, [then] no man can be safe, nor know when he may be the innocent victim of a prevailing faction." In addition to targeting their homes for demolition, Halbritter has cut these plaintiffs off from any and all participation in the Oneida Nation as well as any rights or benefits including the payments by the US Government to the Oneida Nation under the treaties between the two Nations. The decision concludes with a plea by the judges for Congress to expand the power of the US Courts in order that they would be able to have jurisdiction and authority to help victims like the plaintiffs who suffered disenfranchisement without either a hearing or trial and at the pleasure of the defendant Halbritter's prevailing faction. As a result of the decision affirming the district court's decision, the prior voluntary agreement by Halbritter to not do anything to forcibly remove the plaintiffs from their homes and destroy them is no longer in effect. At this time, there appears to be no legal obstacle to Halbritter carrying out the orders for plaintiffs' forcible eviction followed by immediate demolition of plaintiffs' private homes. The plaintiffs remain steadfast in their rejection of the 1993 action of the US Bureau of Indian Affairs to force Halbritter into power over the objection of the 1,000-year-old Traditional Haudenosaunee Confederacy that signed the Treaty of Canandaigua in 1794. The BIA effected a coup de tat in 1993 by rejecting the decision of the Traditional Oneida and Haudenosaunee Leaders to remove Halbritter from any and all positions. The sovereignty and unity of the Oneida Indian Nation and the Iroquois Confederacy was respected until 1993 at which time the US government violated that sovereignty by appointing Halbritter over the objection of the traditional leaders. The 2nd Circuit court previously issued an investigation of the BIA's intrusion regarding the leadership of Halbritter, which still remains open, and pending today. New York US Representative Boehlert publicly admitted in 1993 that a good case could be made that he traded his vote and supported NAFTA in exchange for then President Clinton ordering the BIA to over-rule the Traditional Oneida Leaders so that Halbritter could complete secret negotiations for the Turning Stone Casino with then NY Governor Cuomo, which was never ratified by the New York State Legislature as required by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The plaintiffs remain convinced that the US Courts have sufficient authority under the Indian Civil Rights Act. The plaintiffs are concerned that Congress may use the inexcusable treatment of them by Halbritter as justification to grant the request of these judges and enact laws greatly expanding the power and authority of the US Courts to further erode tribal sovereignty. It has never been the desire or goal of the plaintiffs to undermine tribal sovereignty, but to always strengthen it and restore it by reversing the violation of that sovereignty by the BIA in 1993. However, this court decision reveals that the sovereignty already violated by the BIA is in further jeopardy and the plaintiffs are concerned and aware that tribal sovereignty will be lost because of those like Halbritter who abuse it in order to create a dictatorship, an aristocracy, and an oligarchy, as observed by the court decision. Plaintiffs are preparing their appeal to the US Supreme Court to seek a ruling that this case is not about safety or economic consequences but about the exercise and abuse of power to legislatively enact laws targeting plaintiffs for additional punitive treatment not shared or suffered by others of the nation simply because plaintiffs continue to disagree with the legitimacy of Halbritter's power over the Nation. Plaintiffs will also ask the Court of Appeals to stay any evictions or destruction of homes while their appeal to the US Supreme Court is pending. The plaintiffs remain hopeful that their peaceful refusal to abandon their traditional beliefs and ways will serve as an example of the Great Law of Peace. They give thanks to all who have supported them in any way whether it be through prayer, phone cards, kind thoughts or food. They pray that Halbritter will unlock the Longhouse doors and no longer use it as a weapon and symbol of oppression. And they pray that their example of Peace and Compassion will become contagious. Ny' Weh- thank you, Diane Schenandoah (315) 363-6248 Danielle Schenandoah-Patterson Onyota'a:Ka PO box 555 Oneida Indian Territory Oneida, NY-13421- Fax: (315) 363-1655 Phone (315) 363-6248

<p>From the 32 Territory: April 3, 2004: On April 2, 2004, the three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in New York City, rendered their decision regarding the appeal filed by the 19 'dissidents' whose homes have been targeted for demolition by Ray Halbritter. </p> <!--break--><p> Posted on behalf of the traditional Oneida.</p> <p>Greetings from the Onyota':Ka Oneida Wolf Clan of the Haudenosaunee Six Nations Iroquois Confederacy</p> <p>P R E S S R E L E A S E: Please Distribute Widely</p> <p>From the 32 Territory: April 3, 2004: On April 2, 2004, the three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, in New York City, rendered their decision regarding the appeal filed by the 19 'dissidents' whose homes have been targeted for demolition by Ray Halbritter. The plaintiffs include Maisie Shenandoah, a 72-year-old Traditional Wolf Clan Mother. Other plaintiffs include Diane Schenandoah, her three children; Vicky Shenandoah-Halsey and her two children, and Danielle Schenandoah-Patterson and her three children including Jolene, age 9, and Monica<br /> Antoine-Watson and her son Kyle.</p> <p>In their seven-page decision, the three judges unanimously affirmed the decision by the US District Court in Syracuse that the US Courts do not have jurisdiction to enter any order protecting these women and children from the homelessness to be caused by Halbritter's so-called "housing program". The three judges did express frustration that in their opinion, the US Congress had not given them sufficient power under the Indian Civil Rights Act to do anything to<br /> help the plaintiffs.</p> <p>In one passage, the three Federal judges condemned the conduct and actions of Halbritter and the other defendants (including the non-Oneida prosecutor, Peter Carmen, appointed by Halbritter) against these innocent victims, even going so far as commenting that it would be a "mockery of common sense" to apply the "name of liberty" to Halbritter's reign over the Oneida Nation. The judges stated that "[e]ven though the actions of the ruling members of the Nation [Halbritter] may be partly inexcusable herein, we can only remedy wrongs which invoke the jurisdiction of<br /> this Court."</p> <p>The judges went even further by quoting Alexander Hamilton as saying "If [a] legislature [referring to the defendants' so-called men's council] can disfranchise any number of citizens [such as plaintiffs] at pleasure by general descriptions, it may soon confine all the votes to a small number of partisans, and establish an aristocracy or an oligarchy; if it [Halbritter] may banish at discretion all whom [Halbritter had] render[ed] obnoxious without hearing or trial, [then] no man can be safe, nor know when he may be the innocent victim of a prevailing faction." In addition to targeting their homes for demolition, Halbritter has cut these plaintiffs off from any and all participation in the Oneida Nation as well as any rights or benefits including the payments by the US Government to the Oneida Nation under the<br /> treaties between the two Nations.</p> <p>The decision concludes with a plea by the judges for Congress to expand the power of the US Courts in order that they would be able to have jurisdiction and authority to help victims like the plaintiffs who suffered disenfranchisement without either a hearing or trial and at the pleasure of the defendant<br /> Halbritter's prevailing faction.</p> <p>As a result of the decision affirming the district court's decision, the prior voluntary agreement by Halbritter to not do anything to forcibly remove the plaintiffs from their homes and destroy them is no longer in effect. At this time, there appears to be no legal obstacle to Halbritter carrying out the orders for plaintiffs' forcible eviction followed by immediate demolition of plaintiffs' private homes.</p> <p>The plaintiffs remain steadfast in their rejection of the 1993 action of the US Bureau of Indian Affairs to force Halbritter into power over the objection of the 1,000-year-old Traditional Haudenosaunee Confederacy that signed the Treaty of Canandaigua in 1794.</p> <p>The BIA effected a coup de tat in 1993 by rejecting the decision of the Traditional Oneida and Haudenosaunee Leaders to remove Halbritter from any and all positions. The sovereignty and unity of the Oneida Indian Nation and the Iroquois Confederacy was respected until 1993 at which time the US government violated that sovereignty by appointing Halbritter over the objection of the traditional leaders. The 2nd Circuit court previously issued an investigation of the BIA's intrusion regarding the leadership of Halbritter, which still remains open, and pending<br /> today.</p> <p>New York US Representative Boehlert publicly admitted in 1993 that a good case could be made that he traded his vote and supported NAFTA in exchange for then President Clinton ordering the BIA to over-rule the Traditional Oneida Leaders so that Halbritter could complete secret negotiations for the Turning Stone Casino with then NY Governor Cuomo, which was never ratified by the New York State Legislature as required<br /> by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.</p> <p>The plaintiffs remain convinced that the US Courts have sufficient authority under the Indian Civil Rights Act. The plaintiffs are concerned that Congress may use the inexcusable treatment of them by Halbritter as justification to grant the request of these judges and enact laws greatly expanding the power and authority of the US Courts to further erode<br /> tribal sovereignty.</p> <p>It has never been the desire or goal of the plaintiffs to undermine tribal sovereignty, but to always strengthen it and restore it by reversing the violation of that sovereignty by the BIA in 1993. However, this court decision reveals that the sovereignty already violated by the BIA is in further jeopardy and the plaintiffs are concerned and aware that tribal sovereignty will be lost because of those like Halbritter who abuse it in order to create a dictatorship, an aristocracy, and an oligarchy, as<br /> observed by the court decision.</p> <p>Plaintiffs are preparing their appeal to the US Supreme Court to seek a ruling that this case is not about safety or economic consequences but about the exercise and abuse of power to legislatively enact laws targeting plaintiffs for additional punitive treatment not shared or suffered by others of the nation simply because plaintiffs continue to disagree with the legitimacy of Halbritter's power over the Nation. Plaintiffs will also ask the Court of Appeals to stay any evictions or destruction of homes while their appeal to the US Supreme Court is pending.</p> <p>The plaintiffs remain hopeful that their peaceful refusal to abandon their traditional beliefs and ways will serve as an example of the Great Law of Peace. They give thanks to all who have supported them in any way whether it be through prayer, phone cards, kind thoughts or food. They pray that Halbritter will unlock the Longhouse doors and no longer use it as a weapon and symbol of oppression. And they pray that their example of Peace and Compassion will become<br /> contagious.</p> <p>Ny' Weh- thank you,</p> <p>Diane Schenandoah (315) 363-6248<br /> Danielle Schenandoah-Patterson</p> <p>Onyota'a:Ka<br /> PO box 555<br /> Oneida Indian Territory<br /> Oneida, NY-13421-<br /> Fax: (315) 363-1655<br /> Phone (315) 363-6248 </p>

Latest Oneida Court Decision http://rochester.indymedia.org/node/1605

Latest Oneida Court Decision http://rochester.indymedia.org/node/1605