it's you know the extinguishment of sovereignty of tribes and as you saw in the treaty with the fort laramie treaty you know everything you know a good a good chunk of the sea of north dakota west of the missouri river and south that part river but is part of the greats you nation and there are other charities that also you know lay claim to other parts of north dakota if those treaties were honored north dakota would look like a spider web and so the you know and this is true of many states right so what you see always is that the state is always in conflict with the tribes when the state is powerful the tribes are weak when the tribes are powerful the state is weak the very and i think that americans need to think about that like what does it mean what is there you know what is there everyone talks about states as if they're the sort of prosaic beings that came into existence somehow or all member you know arizona ends and coloradans but what does that really mean it what does a state really neat and it means the suppression of native sovereignty and the taking of resources at will and thi

histories they're being invoked now as with the bigger case noko homa and with dapple with the fort laramie treaties they actually are only treaties or only enter into by sovereign nations so you have to by definition be a sovereign nation to even enter into a treaty and these treaties particular trees were ratified by the u.s. senate and so they under the constitution never mind international law into the constitution they are considered the supreme law of the land so with the you and of course you know you saw what happened every july 4th and mount rushmore the black hills and the area north steps down the rocks your education are all within the treaty boundaries agreed upon with the great sioux nation of which cheyenne river and down iraq and my my dad's tribe the stripe are all components of it and i know that there there's been resistance for for generations to a lot of issues but this this resistance of the pipeline that we can look back at downfall what happened there standing rock as kind of a key mormon in that in that movement to it can you take us back to that and then talk about

and remember that these monuments are in contravention of the treaty of fort laramie of 1868, this isrved upon, so this isa that has been carved upon, so this is a real incendiary context to have for president trump is part of his campaign clearly. from the indigenous point of view for many commentators, this is visitors they don't need at a very difficult time for all people in the united states. and of course president trump alluded in his speech at that rally to the black lives matter movement and some of the rallies we have seen over the past month or six weeks. saying this a merciless campaign to wipe out america's history and defame ncos. i'm guessing from what you said at the indigenous people regard their history as been raised before his set straight. how do they fit into the black lives matter movement? president trump is playing the next in playbook where he is trying to send dog whistles to —— nixon playbook. as he used native people for political objectives, president trump is trying to use this backdrop to send out certain signals to his base also. let's not forget the b

mount rushmore and the black hills werehe black awarded to the people of the sioux nation by the fort laramie treaty of 1868. because their expedition discovered gold, congress immediately set into motion demand to take the land from the sioux indians. cases dragged on through the courts until 1980 when the decision was finally made to take the land. said, aenting judge more ripened rank case of dishonest dealings may ever be found. that's where it stands now. billion given $1 in 1980 waiting for these two people. and they refuse the money. host: as far as mount rushmore itself, would you call for a change? a removal? caller: mount rushmore was built on stolen land. it was built by people who took the land from the indians. it certainly isn't a symbol that represents our people. host: what should be done with it? offer: it should be closed and ignored. i don't think there's any way you can destroy. host: it was last week the president appeared at mount rushmore to make comments leading up to the july 4 weekend. those are available at sea spend -- c-span.org. in mount interested rushmore itsel

indian collective and nick himself have beeeen att really opposed to because it violates the 1868 fort laramie treaty because it trespasses through the heart of our treaty lands and skirts around two major reservations of cheyenne to river as well as the road but sioux tribe. it is important to know the state of south dakota has one of the highest rates of incarceration of native people. about 10% of the states population. but we make up about 30% of the jail population. in a place likike where nick is beining held right now, , i thit 7 75% jailto populalation are native right n. this is more than just his arrest at mounrushmore. it is about a long-standing treaty claim. i think nick would agree with me on this that this is about treaty rights. he is a treaty defender. it is unclear why all 15 other protesters were released but not nick himself. amy: i want to go back to this history because a number of by theseem surprised whole history of not rushmore. sculpted heads of presidents washington, jefferson, lincoln, and theodore roosevelt blasted out of the ancient granite between 1927-1941 by 4

lands he's about to visit, belong to the great sioux nation under a treaty signed in 1851 and the fort laramie treaty of 1868. and have to tell him, he does not have permission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territory at this time." the government acknowledged tribal sovereignty over the black hills in two separate treaties, committed the land "for the absolute and undisturbed use and occupancy of the sioux." but gold was discovered there in the 1870's, and the army drove the indigenous people out. decades of armed indigenous resistance to the waves of settler colonists that followed ended with the army's brutal massacre of lakota women, children, and the elderly at wounded knee on december 29, 1890. all of this comes as indian countrtry has been p particulary hard-hit by the coronavirus pandemicic. well, for more, we go to rapid city, south dakota, not far from the black hills, where we're joined by nick tilsen, president and ceo of the ndn collective a national organization dedicated to building indigenous power. he's a citizen of the oglala lakota nation on pine ridge reser

he's about to visit belong to the great sioux nation under a treaty signened in 185851 and te fort l laramie treaty of 1868 ad i have to tetell him he doesn't have permimission from its original sovereign owners to enter the territorory at this time." meanwhile, south dakotaa republican governor kristi noem said tuesday the thousands of people attending trump's mount rushmore event will not be required to wear a mask or to remain six feeeet apart. >> we will be giving out free fast masks if they choose to wear one, but we won't be social distancing. amy: governor noem's comment came even as a growing number of republican officials called on americans to wear masks in public. this is tennessee republican senator lamar alexander speaking on tuesday. >> unforortunately, , this simie lifefe-saving practicece has bee part of ththe polititical debate that says this, if you are for trump, you don't wear a mask. if you're against trump, you u . that i is why am suggesteded ife president t occasionally wear ra mask. amamy: a new york judge has ordered a preliminary injunction against the publication

mount rushmore and the black hills werehe black awarded to the people of the sioux nation by the fort laramiereaty of 1868. because their expedition discovered gold, congress immediately set into motion demand to take the land from the sioux indians. cases dragged on through the courts until 1980 when the decision was finally made to take the land. said, aenting judge more ripened rank case of dishonest dealings may ever be found. that's where it stands now. billion given $1 in 1980 waiting for these two people. and they refuse the money. host: as far as mount rushmore itself, would you call for a change? a removal? caller: mount rushmore was built on stolen land. it was built by people who took the land from the indians. it certainly isn't a symbol that represents our people. host: what should be done with it? offer: it should be closed and ignored. i don't think there's any way you can destroy. host: it was last week the president appeared at mount rushmore to make comments leading up to the july 4 weekend. those are available at sea spend -- c-span.org. in mount interested rushmore itself,