Still mired in back room deals?
Only the Casino KoolAid consumers seem to have ignored Hawaii:
What could be more simple? :
Within weeks of the 8-1 Carcieri v Salazar
decision, a second strike on
fee to trust was issued. This time it came from a case
originating in the state of Hawaii.
In the 9-0 decision on Hawaii v. the Office of
Hawaiian Affairs. Justice Alito wrote, "It would
raise grave constitutional concerns" Congress sought
to "cloud Hawaii's title to its
sovereign lands" after it had joined the
Union.
"We have emphasized that Congress cannot,
after statehood reserve or convey....lands that
have already been bestowed upon a state".
How many readers of this paper
could be effected by issues concerning
land that has been "bestowed upon
a state"; as an original colony, through
disestablished territory or
when the territory entered into
statehood?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment