Sequoyah v. TVA, 6th Circuit, Docket No. 79-1633: Appellants Reply Brief

Appellants reply brief brought by Native American groups in their suit to stop the Tennessee Valley Authority\u27s Tellico Project

Sequoyah v. TVA, 6th Circuit, Docket No. 79-1633: Required Statement For Rehearing En Banc

Petition for rehearing and suggestion for rehearing en banc under rules 35(B) and 40 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, submitted by Cherokee groups as part of their lawsuit to prevent the completion of the Tellico Project

In the Light of Justice: The Rise of Human Rights in Native America & the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

This book examines the proposition that Native American rights are inalienable human rights. It urges Indian Country to stride toward the human rights framework created by the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ( UNDRIP ). Relying on atonement and forgiveness traditions, it asks the United States to heal wounds of the past and create a more just society by implementing the UNDRIP.https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/books/1039/thumbnail.jp

VIDEO: Keynote Address: In the Light of Justice: The Rise of Human Rights in Native America and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

VIDEO: 6:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. Evening Lecture and Book Signing: In the Light of Justice: The Rise of Human Rights in Native America and the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Introduction to Speaker: Carla Fredericks, University of Colorado Law School Keynote Speaker: Walter Echo-Hawk, human rights advocate and autho

Preface

On his very first day in the New World, Christopher Columbus introduced Europe's long heritage of religious intolerance into this hemisphere. He reported on the native inhabitants he encountered on 12 October 1492: They ought to be good servants and of good intelligence. . . . I believe that they would easily be made Christians because it seemed to me that they had no religion. Our Lord pleasing, I will carry off six of them at my departure to Your Highnesses, in order that they may learn to speak. Although Columbus did not tarry long to learn more about these native people ("I do not wish to delay but to discover and go to many Islands to find gold") his legacy of Old World insensitivity toward the indigenous religions of the Western Hemisphere remains a model of behavior followed by his cultural descendants in their relations with American Indians to this day. Five hundred years later, Native Americans are still defending themselves against religious intolerance as a matter of cultural survival. Two recent Supreme Court decisions have created a growing crisis in religious liberty throughout Indian Country. These cases deny First Amendment protection for tribal religious practices that predate the founding of the United States! Many people are genuinely surprised to learn from the Supreme Court that no constitutional or statutory protection can be found for native religious freedom under American law. After all, our society prides itself on protecting individual liberties, and worship is a freedom that most Americans take for granted. By excluding tribal religions from the First Amendment and placing them in an unprotected class, these two decisions have become benchmarks in the struggle that began on 12 October 1492 between two vastly different cultures. Even now-as tribal leaders prepare to go to Congress to seek statutory protections in the legislative arena-this cultural conflict undoubtedly will cause many Americans to consider whether they want to remain the cultural descendants of Columbus or whether, after five hundred years, they should adopt some indigenous values and become more ”native” to the hemisphere in which they live

In the Light of Justice: The Rise of Human Rights in Native America & the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

This book examines the proposition that Native American rights are inalienable human rights. It urges Indian Country to stride toward the human rights framework created by the UN Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ( UNDRIP ). Relying on atonement and forgiveness traditions, it asks the United States to heal wounds of the past and create a more just society by implementing the UNDRIP.https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/books/1039/thumbnail.jp

The Need For An American Land Ethic

Mr. Walter Echo-Hawk will present a lecture titled "The Need For An American Land Ethic" as part of the Spring 2014 Native Pathways Speaker Series. The Native Pathways Speaker series is sponsored by the Department of Native American Studies, with funding from the College of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences and the Office of Diversity and Inclusion.Mr. Echo-Hawk is a Native American attorney, tribal judge, author, activist, and law professor. He represents Indian tribes on important legal issues, such as treaty rights, water rights, religious freedom, prisoner rights, and repatriation rights. His career spans the pivotal years when Indian tribes reclaimed their land, sovereignty, and pride in a stride toward freedom

The Impact of the U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples on the Future of Federal Indian Law

Prof. Walter Echo-Hawk discusses the future of Federal Indian law

Native American Religious Liberty: Five Hundred Years after Columbus

INTRODUCTION Freedom of worship is a protected liberty that most Americans commonly take for granted. However, for Native Americans today, there is a growing crisis in religious liberty created by two recent Supreme Court decisions. These cases deny First Amendment protection for ancient tribal religious practices that predate the founding of the United States and the writing of its Constitution. This loophole in religious liberty has created a human rights crisis in Indian Country and a call to Congress for a new law to protect the First Amendment rights of the First Americans. Senator Daniel K. Inouye, chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, and seven co-sponsors introduced the “Native American Free Exercise of Religion Act of 1993” (NAFERA) (S. 1021) on 25 May 1993. As Indian tribes gather for this legislative battle, it is useful to find a framework for understanding why such legislation is necessary in a nation that prides itself in protecting individual freedom. For most citizens, it is puzzling how any religious faith-much less the native religions of the land-can be excluded from the ambit of the First Amendment and placed in an unprotected class. Is it a simple legal anomaly? Failure of American jurisprudence to incorporate basic indigenous values? Or something darker