I've worked with Native Americans much of my adult life. My tribal background is from the Middle East, not North America.
Most of the Native Americans I've met are fine people. They have welcomed me into their community and I work well with them.
However...
The worst cases of racist talk and behavior have also been from the Native people I've lived with. Sadly, I consistently run into Native people who seem to think that their own historical challenges give them permission to attack, demean, insult, and sometimes physically assault non-Native people. I've had a Native kid in my classroom say, out loud, "You know we all hate white people. Why not just admit it?" Some Native parents tell their children that ALL their problems stem from white people - there are some villages here where non-Natives are not physically safe to live.
Like I said, this is not a broad brush to paint Native Americans. It's just personal experience with some people, not all. I've met bigots with ancestries in Europe, Asia, South American, Mexico, and Africa, too.
My gut feeling is that bigotry and racism stem from the whole concept of tribal identity. Tribal identity is the ultimate "us vs. them." It tells me a lot that many Native tribal names translate as "the human beings." The Cheyanne knew there were other tribes out there; their name for themselves tells me a lot about their opinion of their neighbors. "Yup'ik" means "real people." The implication is that the Athabascans up the river just don't meet the "real" test. Along comes people from other parts of the world; the tribal outlook means that they're not "real" people, either.
None of the things in this lawsuit surprise me. I've heard it myself in public schools, so I can imagine how it would be stated at a construction site.
I like my Western outlook where individuals have God-given rights.
The worst cases of racist talk and behavior have also been from the Native people I've lived with.
Tribal identity is the ultimate "us vs. them." It tells me a lot that many Native tribal names translate as "the human beings."
I had not been aware of this, but it certainly explains a lot.
Right up here is East King County WA (outside Seattle) we have an interesting thing taking place. A recently re-declared "tribe" has just been approved to build a casino. They recently searched for suitable property and located a nice big lot just off the I-90 freeway. They bought it and this was now declared "tribal land". Never mind that it is some 20+ miles from their tribal headquarters. Then, they petitioned the government to allow them to build a casino on said ideally situated property next to I-90. Recently, that permission was granted.
From what I can see, the whole thing is a scam to make heap big wampum running a casino. Reminds me of the "tribe" back East where anyone with as little as something like 1/32 "Native American blood" is part of the tribe and gets to share in the rewards of the $$$ their casino rakes in. IIRC, there is no one in that tribe who is even 50% Native American.
Having said all that, everything I have read and from what I can see on their website, they are working hand-in-hand with the local governments, and intend to be very environmentally-conscious in building their casino. There won't be a huge blinding TV screen billboard situated along the freeway.
Regarding the case at hand, I firmly believe that if a tribal corporation is working off tribal land - in our sovereign nation, so to speak - then they are subject to our laws. This is the point the litigant is making. I believe the same thing applies should a corporation based in WA work in OR - they are subject to the OR state labor and environmental and other laws. Same if a Canadian company comes down and works in WA.
These Tribal attornys can't seriously believe that a Chinese company could come here and start a child labor sweatshop just because it is legal in their country?!!? Isn't that a fair analogy?