[NewJerseyJoe]

Prima facie, it looks like the loser governer of NY is on thin ice. Worcester v. Georgia (1832) established that State laws (such as New York's) have no authority in dealings with the Indian Nations.

The Constitution says that only Congress has the authority to deal with the Indian Nations. Of course, we all know how much respect liberals have for the Constitution.

[Behind Liberal Lines]

Prima facie, it looks like the loser governer of NY is on thin ice. Worcester v. Georgia (1832) established that State laws (such as New York's) have no authority in dealings with the Indian Nations.

Actually, in OKLAHOMA TAX COMM'N v. POTAWATOMI TRIBE, 498 U.S. 505 (1991) the US Supreme Court held, in a state is free to collect taxes on such sales to nonmembers of the tribe which is all the NYS law seeks to do.

[AuntB]

“Prima facie, it looks like the loser governer of NY is on thin ice. Worcester v. Georgia (1832) established that State laws (such as New York’s) have no authority in dealings with the Indian Nations”

Do you know what the result of that decision and Worcester winning it was?

The trail of tears. Jackson refused to enforce the Supreme court ruling in favor of ‘Worchester’, who was a missionary representing the Cherokee, against the state of Georgia.

Law means nothing if it’s not enforced.