Upstate Citizens for Equality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article has been nominated to be checked for its neutrality.
Discussion of this nomination can be found on the talk page. (January 2008)

1 About
2 Legal Actions
3 Other News
4 References
5 External links

[edit] About

The Upstate Citizens for Equality (UCE) is a group based out of Verona, NY that opposes the Indian Land Claim and what they see as flawed Federal Indian Policy. UCE currently has 3 chapters with a combined membership of around 10,000.

[edit] Legal Actions

The group has organized rallies at the Oneida tribe's gas stations and casino in the past. The group has challenged the tribal-state compact's validity. The court ruled that the compact violated the State Constitution^[1] because the legislature failed to approve of the compact, despite former Governor Cuomo's representation that no such action was required. The Court of Appeals affirmed this decision. The Oneida Indian Nation petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to grant cert. But the Court denied cert.^[2] because the case primarily involved a state issue and not a federal one. Note that a denial of cert. is NOT a judgment on the case's merits and is not to be used as legal precedent. But the lower court's decision stands until overturned. Further, the Rules of Decision Act, as interpreted by Erie Railroad, requires federal courts to apply state law where there is no conflict between state and federal law. Where there is a conflict of laws, federal law preempts state law under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. IGRA incorporates state laws into federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1166 provides in pertinent part that "for purposes of Federal law, all State laws pertaining to the licensing, regulation, or prohibition of gambling, including but not limited to criminal sanctions applicable thereto, shall apply in Indian country in the same manner and to the same extent as such laws apply elsewhere in the State."^[3] The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit has held that approval of a Compact by the Secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior "did not and, under IGRA, could not, alter its validity or non-validity under state law."^[4] To date, the Second Circuit has not adopted this view in regards to the validity of a compact, however the Second Circuit has adopted the part of the Tenth Circuit's decision on waiver of sovereign immunity.^[5] But, to date, the 2d Circuit has yet to hold that OIN has waived its immunity.

On June 13, 2007 when the Associate Deputy Secretary of the Interior declined to reconsider its approval of the compact, Mr. Cason stated, "the 1993 Compact continues to be in effect for purposes of the IGRA." ^[6] On August 7, 2007 in an action between New York and the Oneida Indian Nation, U.S. District Judge Kahn, upheld Magistrate Treece's order directing the depositions of high ranking officials and denying the State's motions. The decision also dismissed the Amended Complaint pleading, which attacked the Board's authority to amend the Compact due to Peterman and Seneca, on subject matter jurisdiction grounds. The fact that the amended complaint was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds deprived the court of the opportunity to address the compact's validity at the federal level. If the compact was invalid, then the Oneida Indian Nation would be violating federal law (operating a gaming facility without a tribal-state compact).^[7] Such a violation of federal law would have provided the requisite subject matter jurisdiction (federal question). While State sought to enjoin the Nation from operating Instant Multi Game ("IMG") based on its failure to adhere to the procedures in the Compact.^[8], the state has since dropped the case.^[9]

Daniel Warren, the Chairman of the Niagara Frontier Chapter of UCE, has commenced a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and the tribal-state compact between the Seneca nation and New York that authorizes the Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino^[10].

UCE has recently demanded that New York State, Madison and Oneida Counties conduct inspections of the Oneida Nation's SavOn gas stations located off the Nation's reservation or face legal action^[11].

In its June 4, 1993 letter of approval of the Compact between the Oneida Indian Nation of New York and New York State the U.S. Department of the Interior specifically stated that the approval was for the 32 acres currently occupied by the OIN and that the DOI noted that "The Compact authorizes gaming on Nation lands in general terms that paraphrases the IGRA definition of 'Indian lands.' These lands include the Nation's 32 acre tract in Madison County near the City of Oneida where gaming is currently being conducted. The compact does not specifically refer to the site where we understand the Nation has built a major new facility in anticipation of being able to conduct gaming in the future. Since the Compact tracks the 'Indian lands' definition of IGRA, we need not decide and take no position with regard to whether this new facility is on 'Indian land' as that term is used in IGRA."^[12] This merely deals with the compact's scope, i.e. what is covered under the compact. Certainly something that raises many questions that the UCE hopes will eventually lead to shutting down the Turning Stone Casino.

To "re-establish sovereign authority" over the land purchased on the open market, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the "proper avenue" for the Oneida Indian Nation was through § 465 of the Indian Reorganization Act and apply to the Department of the Interior to place the disputed lands into federal trust.^[13] On April 2005, the Oneida Indian Nation applied to have this land taken into trust. The Oneida Nation also took other legal steps to try to preserve Class III gaming at Turning Stone.

On February 27, 2008, the BIA released its Final Environmental Impact Statement and recommended that 13,084 acres be placed into trust. After this announcement, the DOI gave a 30 day comment period and announced that it would have a decision on or after March 25, 2008.^[14]

Some government officials have expressed concern with creating a "patchwork of taxable and tax-exempt properties" in addition to a "jurisdictional nightmare." In opposing the OIN's land-into-trust application, New York has raised the question of whether the Indian Reorganization Act even applies to the Oneidas because they specifically rejected the Indian Reorganization Act 12 to 57 in a vote conducted on June 17, 1936.^[15] Initially the Oneida were considered not eligible, but in a reconsideration based on the discussion in the case of U.S. v. Boylan, the Department of Interior changed its position and conducted the referendum.^[16]

On March 2008, County Executive Anthony Picente held a public meeting to discuss the possibility of negotiating a settlement before the March 25th deadline. Congressman Arcuri pulled unprofessional backdoor politics to try and stall the decision. While criticized by both sides for killing any progress made between the two sides, Mr. Arcuri explained that it was his attempt to try to encourage negotiations. But there has not been any attempt to negotiate since then. It is interesting to note that on January 2008, Mr. Ray Halbritter sent a proposed settlement offer to the state and the county, but has not received a response to date.^[17] The Nation has offered to negotiate an agreement pertaining to future trust applications, but the state and local government have not responded to this offer.

On May 20, 2008, the DOI announced that it intends to take 13,004 acres into trust.^[18] Reactions from both sides were to be as expected, the Oneida Indian Nation offering to negotiate and settle the issues involved, the state and county officials promising more costly litigation in lieu of negotiation.

It is of further interest to note the case currently before the U.S. Sup. Ct. where Rhode Island officials are suing on grounds that the IRA is unconstitutional. Oral arguments are slated for the Fall.

[edit] Other News

It has been reported that every Native Nation located in the vicinity of New York State and other tribes represented by the United South and Eastern Tribes (USET) views Upstate Citizens for Equality (UCE) as an anti-Indian group.^[19]. The publication that this article was published in is owned by the Oneida Indian Nation of New York^[20]. The Oneida Indian Nation has had the most contact with this organization and is constantly under attack by UCE in the media, courts, and other venues as noted above. USET currently, and at the time of the adoption of this resolution was lead by a representative of the Oneida Indian Nation of New York elected by the 24 Native Nation representatives.^[21] The Oneida Nation is currently in litigation with UCE as noted above. The Oneida Nation has been charged with making accusations of racism in order to stifle the voice of those who oppose its policies^[22]. UCE officials have able been charged with racism by non-Indians ^[23], though the UCE denies such accusations ^[24].

In December of 2006, UCE President David Vickers made a comment while speaking on a Syracuse, NY radio program that "These people [Indians] can't be shot," causing more concern about UCE's alleged racist nature.^[25]