Immigration Case Hinges on Degree of Indian Blood
| AR Articles on Immigration Law |
|---|
| The Green Card Crap Shoot (May 2003) |
| Fade to Brown (May 2003) |
| A Chronicle of Capitulation (Aug. 2002) |
| Immigration: The Debate Becomes Interesting (Jul. 1995) |
| Search AmRen.com for Immigration Law |
| More news stories on Immigration Law |
A government attorney told an immigration judge on Friday that a native Canadian man claiming indigenous treaty rights to the U.S. lacks sufficient Indian blood to qualify for those rights.
Peter Roberts, a 54-year-old dentist from Tsawwassen, B.C., claims he is 50 percent Campbell River Indian—the son of a full-blooded Indian father and a white mother—and is thus entitled to live and work in the U.S. and pass freely across its borders under what’s known as the Jay Treaty.
{snip}
Roberts’ attorney, Len Saunders, said it was not uncommon for some Indians decades ago to deny their lineage to avoid discrimination and that Campbell River band documents issued to Roberts show he is in fact 50 percent native Canadian.
{snip}
The Jay Treaty of 1794 allowed native North Americans free trade and travel between the U.S. and Canada, then a territory of Great Britain. Their rights were later restated in U.S. immigration laws and include the right to live and work in the U.S.
Because they are not immigrants, Jay Treaty natives don’t need a U.S. green card, but they qualify for one, and many, like Roberts, get one to make it easier to invoke their treaty rights.
{snip}
(Posted on January 21, 2008)
Comments
I grew up in Oklahoma and Indian blood, Indian cards and tribal membership were such a racket. I knew quite a few blond hair/blue eyed people who had Indian cards and therefore privilges given to Indians such as free health care ect. I also knew many nearly full blood Indians who were not lucky enough to be on the Indian rolls and could not claim such privilige.
Posted by Spartan24 at 6:42 PM on January 21
What bothers me about this is that Mestizos in Latin America will seize on this (some already have) and claim they have a right to travel into the US. Jay’s Treaty is an anachronism, and any judge who allows legal entry under this (as some surely will) is a fool.
Posted by at 1:51 AM on January 22
The treaty was with Britain, and Britain is no longer the executive power in Canada. It’s a moot point; therefore Jay’s treaty is no longer valid.
Posted by Josef Francois Duhesme at 1:24 AM on January 23
The “Mestizos in Latin America” have already “seized” on this historical FACT e.g. 80% of Mexicans have Amerind blood flowing through their veins and I don’t mean that 1/16th or 1/32nd Cherokee that Americans shamelessly haul out to proclaim their “native” privilege. Moreover, “Mexico” is not a spanish term nor is the eagle at the center of the Mexican flag a european standard of arms meaning that as early as 1810, Mexicans chose to self-identify with their indigenous origins NOT their colonial occupiers. Besides the obvious threat this poses to ugly American assumptions about territorial sovereignty, why is basic knowledge of this historical FACT so lacking in the consciousness of presumably informed Americans?
Posted by ENDURING at 6:22 PM on January 23