Sovereignty denied at Mashantucket

If the U.S. truly recognizes the sovereignty of the tribes in its midst can it draw limits? Of course. The U.S. would not cut off its nose to save its face. For example, sovereignty does not mean that a tribe can invite jihadists to set up terrorist training camps on their reservations. In such a scenario, the U.S. would usurp tribal sovereignty to protect its interests. Neither can a tribe make laws legalizing that which the U.S. declares illegal. Hence, gaming could not be stopped on reservations if the states already have legalized gambling. But what of worker unions? Can a tribe declare illegal what the state considers legal? Some tribes already have unions in their casinos. The Mashantucket Pequots, owners of Foxwoods Casino opposed a union vote by its dealers. The National Labor Relations Board told them they had to let the vote go forward. A majority of dealers subsequently voted to form a union. Does this sovereign nation have to recognize them? I think those dissatisfied could organize and get concessions by wild cat strikes. One such strike last year didn't succeed. But the tribe needs the dealers. I'm sure the dealers could force the tribe to talk without having the federal government stomp on the tribe's sovereignty. I think the NLRB was wrong. Forcing them to legalize something non-criminal/morally neutral that the tribe doesn't want to is an overstepping of the tribe's sovereignty. But I'm just a clueless blogger.

see more of my posts on native americans and human rights.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why did Peter put his coat on before jumping in the water? John 21:7

bike review:men's Simple 3 by Giant

I'm an ex-vanglical but not an ex-christian