Home > News > Narragansett Smoke Shop Feud

July 21, 2003

Tribal raid a sign of 'liberal' New England racism

By Gavin Clarkson

More than 100 years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court noted in United States vs. Kagama that, for Indian tribes, "the people of the states where they are found are often their deadliest enemies." It doesn't appear that things have changed all that much, at least not in New England.

Last Monday, the Rhode Island State Police violently raided a tribal business on the Narragansett reservation. As I watched the news footage, it seemed as if I were watching a newsreel from 1963 Birmingham. There were the burly state troopers, some in uniform, some not, but all with fierce determination in their eyes as they menacingly advanced on the tribal citizens who stood in their path. The assault was rapid and brutally efficient, and in short order the invaders had subdued their targets - Narragansett Indians who dared to assert their sovereign tribal rights and opposed the heavy-handed tactics of the state police. When the cameras showed a police dog attacking a tribal councilman who lay helpless on the ground in handcuffs, all that was missing from the scene was Bull Connor and overpressured fire hoses.

To someone who grew up in the South, it seems hypocritical for those in New England who would saddle any Southerner with the racist baggage of Bull Connor and George Wallace to then hold up New England as a model of racial tolerance. Although the racists in the South tend to be marginalized rednecks, here in New England the racists are often privileged liberal elites who pay lip service to racial harmony only so long as "those people" don't live in their nice neighborhoods. They are happy to visit Indian reservations in the West and buy some turquoise jewelry and pottery; however, the Indians in the East have no business protesting Columbus Day or Thanksgiving festivities. And those "damn Wampanoag Indians" better not interfere with their vacation homes or swimming pools on Cape Cod or Martha's Vineyard. The New England law firms that often represent these privileged elites have developed quite a practice fighting Indian tribes up and down the East Coast, and the blatant racism in some of their litigation tactics is appalling.

So what was the Narragansetts' crime that prompted the savage assault by the jack-booted thugs this past week? They were asserting their sovereign right to engage in commerce on their own tribal lands without being subject to state taxation. They dared to open a smoke shop that offered cheap cigarettes without charging any state taxes. For this offense, the state police put eight tribal members in the hospital?

Seeming to echo the Supreme Court's pronouncement from 1886, an Indian Country Today editorial stated that last Monday's events "should shatter any and all illusions that there is any benevolence on the part of state institutions toward Indian peoples."

Those unfamiliar with American Indian law may be surprised to learn that states do not have the right to tax Indian tribes, and tribes are rightfully entitled to sell goods tax-free to other Indians, including tobacco products. A state may have the right to tax purchases by non-Indians on a reservation, but it cannot force the tribe to collect the taxes, because tribes, just like the states themselves, are entitled to sovereign immunity. A state's only recourse is to negotiate a tax compact with the tribe. Compacts have been negotiated with numerous tribes in other states, including Connecticut.

When Rhode Island took issue with the tribe's activities, it should have gone to federal court to seek an injunction. That is what we do in our supposedly civilized society when we feel wronged - we go to court and sue somebody.

As an Indian law professor, I will grant that the legal issues in this matter are somewhat murky in light of the 1978 Rhode Island Indian Claims Settlement Act. But the proper way to clarify such issues is with the force of one's arguments, not physical prowess. The state of Rhode Island's actions last Monday were entirely inexcusable and further evidence of the racist underbelly that still girds much of New England.

Gavin Clarkson is a member of the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma. He will teach American Indian law this fall at the University of Michigan Law School and is currently a research fellow at the Harvard Law School and the Harvard Business School.

Note: The following comments were posted at the time this story was published. Future comments have been disabled.

Connecticut DOES NOT have a tax compact with its casino tribes. Former Gov. Weicker made a secret agreement to sell a casino monopoly to the Pequots in return for a 25% cut of the slot take.TAXES are voted by the legislature and the legislature is free to raise or lower them on its own with out the approval of tribes. (If I was allowed to build a casino in CT the payments would stop - that wouldn't happen with a tax.)

The casino compacts, forced on the state against its will, provided for the tribe to collect a food and beverage tax on sales to non-Indians. While they still collect the tax it has not been remitted to the state for years. The tribe keeps this money that patrons believe is going to the state.

The Narragansetts know full well that they agreed to abide by all state laws when they settled their land claim. They intentionally provoked the state into enforcing its laws by opening the illegal shop. Had tribal members accepted the warrant and said "See you in court", instead of attacking those delivering it, no one would have been injured. The troopers defended themselves and then arrested those who attacked them. It IS a crime to attack law enforcement officers no matter who you are.

Tribal members have to accept the fact that they are citizens of Rhode Island and also of the United States. They are not an foreign nation. They are not a sovereign nation . They must abide by the agreement they signed in 1978.

You say New Englanders don't want Indians living in their neighborhoods. It is exactly the opposite. We DO want them in our neighborhoods and NOT in segregated reservations. We are against apartheid systems. We accept everyone as equals. It is the tribal leadership that wants separate living arrangements for its members (paid for with our tax dollars, by the way, not by themselves) that would be denied to all outsiders.
Democracy is inclusive. Tribalism is not.

Posted by: Betty Perkowski at July 21, 2003 05:48 AM

The above commentator is obviously very ignorant of what Native Americans own feelings are about themselves. In fact, this person seems as if they are ranting almost incoherently as I read "They are not a sovereign nation" in reference to the Narragansett NATION. Look at the FEDERAL government's interpretation of what a N.A. tribe is, a sovereign entity with which a government-to-government relationship has been established. When the Narragansett and other tribes were feeding this guy's ancestors who washed up sick onto the shores, there was no question about whether or not the native people were members of large nations and confederacies. Just because the majority of the people did not survive the onslaught of invaders does not mean that those who DID survive lose their right to be independent peoples. As for the comment about "apartheid", Native people CHOOSE to remain distinct and to follow our ancient ways because WE ARE DIFFERENT. This does not mean that we dislike you. We are proud of who we are, and we preserve our culture on our own lands. It is stated that attacking cops is illegal, well so is entering Federal trust property as a state entity.

This New Englander seems to suffer from paranoia about the people whose land he/she lives on. It is disheartening that after hundreds of years some European-Americans maintain the mentality of "controlling thr natives" instead of allowing us to choose for ourselves the paths that WE want to follow.

To this person, if you want to learn about Native Americans from my perspective as a Choctaw/Aniyunwiyah N.A., feel free to email me at acarapella@specialtyrisk.com.

Yona we' gejko'ja jakshe'ni

Posted by: Aaron Carapella at July 21, 2003 06:31 AM

Racism is everywhere a white man is. They do not know how to get along with anyone of different colors. They can't even get along with four-leggeds or the winged ones.

Posted by: Clinton J. Yellow Bird at July 21, 2003 07:18 AM

This is nothing more than racism. There is no other country in this world where the indigenous
people are treated like dirt except Australia.
When is the rest of the world going to get a clue
and stick up for us. Even the slaves that were
brought here have made it past where we have gotten. They fought the good fight and won. We can't even start without being told to "You can't do that". Treaties were and are nothing more than words written on paper to hold us down and keep us down. Every culture that has ever come here has learned to hate us and the worst part is, this is our land. This is where the Creator put us, it is where he wanted us to live, Mother Earth taught us how to live here and respect her.
Racism pure and simple. NO ONE ON THIS PLANET WILL EVER CONVINCE ME OTHERWISE!

Posted by: Sandra Eddy at July 21, 2003 07:40 AM

Lets say for a minute that the Tribe did owe taxes due to a previous compact. Now since they would be breaking that compact, the state has the legal right to violently force them into abiding??

From this president I should therefore assume The SixNations need to violently take back most of New England, the Shoshones should use attack dogs to regain nevada, and we should hit the Us gov't and states with mortars for breaking the Laws and rules they created themselves.

I guess violence is a valid response then..

"Avoid needle drugs. The only dope worth shooting is in the white house" -Abbie Kauffman

Posted by: Steve at July 21, 2003 08:38 AM

I am an enrolled Oneida of Wisconsin and I don't know Betty Perkowski from anyone so I won't assume she is not a Native American based upon her name. I will however, based upon her words make that determination (regardless of her potential blood-lines). Only a non-Native could think that "Tribal members have to accept the fact that they are citizens of Rhode Island and also of the United States. They are not an foreign nation. They are not a sovereign nation . They must abide by the agreement they signed in 1978."

This is exactly the kind of thinking that creates the conflicts that we all witness almost daily. Granted, the news cameras are not always there but since they were in the Narragansett reservation case, I would go as far as to say that by not taking action against Conneticut, the United States has violated and could now have presumably terminated it's peace treaty (Yes,assulting an officer is a crime, self defense is not, however, without those precious Treaties, guess what, it isn't a crime unless your Tribal laws say it is. Why? Because Native Americans really are sovereign people and are not subjects of the United States and without those agreements have not responsibility to respect the rights of US Citizen... just like they don't respect us). Please review The Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968 (ICRA) which prohibits Indian tribal governments from enacting or enforcing laws that violate certain individual rights... Since these Constitutional limitations do not apply to tribal governments. I could go on and on but I made the comments that I initially intended to. I do believe that one day someone will force the US and it's States to realize that forcing someone to submit to your control when you were weak does not make your control right nor does it mean you will stay weak forever. Simply recongnizing that we are who we are (or by going back to Europe and giving us back our land) is all most of us really want.

Posted by: Nick Kedrowski at July 21, 2003 10:04 AM

It seems like in this American Society that the only people allowed to make money and control it is the Whiteman because they are the only ones who have the where with all to make things happen, as long they are the ones who benefit from it the most..............

Posted by: Charlotte Banks at July 21, 2003 10:17 AM

I see it as racism as well. I am a citizen of The Muscogee (Creek) Nation. My mother tried opening a smoke shop in Bixby, OK back in the late '80's and received nothing but harrassment from the city of Bixby and it's citizens. It didn't matter to whom we took our complaints, they fell upon deaf ears and blind eyes. The city went on my mother's land and took the first building and when my mother had another built it fell victim to arson. The city of Bixby's fire dept. stood on the roadside and kept the fire from engulfing area "white" lands and told my mother and I that if we wanted the fire out on our land that perhaps we should have our nation take care of it. (Needless to say this was said in a very hateful tone.) My mother finally gave up.

Posted by: mary at July 21, 2003 04:38 PM

Mankind it is said has gotten smarter over time, some of us have and yet there are others like these men that carried out the raid on land that they held no power. What difference is there between what they did and one of us goig into a private home of one of these men and forcing them face down on the floor while our dog attack him, his hands tied? There's no doubt that we would just be another indian behind bars....none of those officers will ever see one day behind bars for what they done at that smoke shop. If the white law is to judge us then allow the these men be judged before us and our laws.

Posted by: Robert Miller at July 21, 2003 09:03 PM

The incident in Rhode Island is a primary example of racism in America. It's simple! America don't want Indigenous People beating them at their own game. Indigenous People are not suppose to have voices, speaking,and reading English. They just want us to exist in Hollywood movies. We know our Human Rights and this country won't honor it. but they will sent aid to some other countries. Spenting millions of dollars chasing two human beings.

Indigenous People should be the first in getting aids and all other federal aids that is avaliable. Because the govt. still has not payed rent yet. Each tribe should now open smoke shops all over this country. Narragansett tribe stood up to racism and they are going to win!

Posted by: frank Sage at July 22, 2003 10:29 AM

I am a Choctaw originaly from Oklahoma, a supporter of Indian rights, tribally and individually. Reading about the raid on the Narragansetts smoke shop in Rhode Island I was concerned about the violence involved in that situation.
After reading Gavin Clarksons' article above, I looked up the 1978 settlement compact between the Narragansetts and the state of Rhode Island. You can read it yourself, particularlly parts A & B at http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/25/chapters/19/subchapters/i/toc.html
I'm not a lawyer and I don't even play one on tv, but it would appear that the compact states rather clearly that by signing and accepting it, the Narragansetts were accepting State taxation.
I am aware of some of the past Indian nation and U.S. relations and histories, my own tribe has been forced or coerced into many treaties by the U.S. and States that were detrimental to us. Most caused the loss of tribal lands and ultimate removal from Mississippi to Oklahoma, against a precedent setting U.S. Supreme Court ruling (Cherokee nation vs State of Georgia, 1831) that
guaranteed upholding of treaty rights to our homelands. Many tribes were forced out despite U.S. law and treaty, an ethnic cleansing which they now condemn in other nations.
Once many tribes were dumped in Indian Territory (Oklahoma) against their will, much of their land and tribal rights were also stripped away by the Dawes Act of 1887, with little or no input from the people it effected, in this so-called land of democracy.
The lesson Indians could easily draw is that Americas democracy, laws and treaties can be set aside when it benefits state or federal goals, that power is what matters to them, not justice. This can be seen today in the Iraq situation, attacked and occupied, despite the fact that they had not attacked the U.S.
They forget that their own history/mythology of their nation is based on rebellion against taxes imposed by England, of which they were subjects.
This happened only a short distance away in Boston, a formal resistance they call a Tea Party, many dressed as Indians for some reason (disguise? shifting blame?).
They then called themselves patriots, forgetting that the original patriots, defenders of their homelands, were Native Americans. We are not their colonies, we are sovereign nations.
Is this the start of a new Revolution? Is it ironic that in our protests we dress like white men?

Posted by: Larry Battiest at July 23, 2003 08:35 PM

I'm reading a thesis about white privelege. It contends, and I quite agree, that being born white has afforded me many unearned priveleges. The writer lists many ways that, on a daily basis, doors are just automatically opened for whites and comfort levels are high for whites in the majority of situations. The author was specifically referring to African American oppression and white suppression, but it clearly extends to all those with other than white backgrounds.

She, the author, also talks about how many will agree that a minority group is oppressed, yet not many are able or willing to call themselves the oppressors. Mainstream, white American culture, in my eyes, is a brutally brain washed society lacking in any meaningful culture. We are taught from the get go that our privelege is truth and unquestionable, but there are alot of us who question.

Sometimes I can see so clearly how beautiful, right and just these 'American' lands would be if the Europeans had just never come. Betty Perkowski just doesn't get it and I find it all very sad.

Posted by: Annie Coulter at July 23, 2003 11:42 PM

Dear Betty,
You pay for our living arrangement with your tax dollars, but perhaps you should take a moment to think about why your tax dollars end up in the hands of Native Americans. It is not because the goverments choose to be so "very generous" to us, it is in some way trying to honor all the broken treaties that were made with Native American tribes by your goverments in the first place. Again maybe you should think about why Natives don't want to live in your neighborhoods (what Native would want to be your neighbor Betty, who would want to be reminded by you what your tax dollars pay or don't pay for) after to forced assimilation attempts imposed by your goverment, payed for with your tax dollars. Seth Pocknett, Mashpee Wampanoag

Posted by: Seth Pocknett at July 24, 2003 01:24 PM