[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: [Fwd: Re: NOVA]



At 05:55 PM 2/28/97 -0700, kmh wrote:
>> Then they're doing things as they should, and no one should give them
>> any trouble as long as they observe the law of the land.  BHI didn't,
>> so BHI got burned.
>
>Depends entirely on who you believe, Jonathon.

   If you mean "believe" as in agreeing with someone's interpretation of the
law, I'll agree with you.  If you mean "believe" as in "that guy's a liar"
I'll have to disagree.

   Given the Eighth Circuit Court's interpretation of the law, Supreme Court
precedence, and the wording of Title 25 which covers Indian trust lands, BHI
did wrong.  The law and Supreme Court decisions are very clear on the matter
that sale of anything subject to trust restrictions must be approved by the
Secretary of the Interior, and if it is not then the sale is null and void.
It's not a matter of somebody lying about it, those are the facts.

   Personally, in terms of whether I "believe" with the court's opinion of
the law, I'm on their side.  It's an ugly bit of federal law, but I didn't
see any opening within either South Dakota law nor Title 25 for BHI to keep
"Sue."  It may strike people as odd that the court would deem a fossil
"land," but South Dakota law is very specific in that respect and <shrug>
it's just something we'll have to live with.

** Dinosauria On-Line. Home of THE DINOSTORE ** "Those who trade a        **
** (Dino stuff for sale), Jeff's Journal of  ** little freedom for a      **
** Dinosaur Paleontology, Jeff's Dinosaur    ** little security will soon **
** Picture Gallery, and The DOL Dinosaur     ** find they have none of    **
** Omnipedia. http://www.dinosauria.com      ** either." -- Jeff Poling   **