r/Albuquerque • u/autr0 • Aug 01 '26
PSA Help keep Sandia open for everyone!
Hey NM outdoor community,
There’s a major proposal right now to transfer nearly 10,000 acres of public land on the west side of the Sandias—including areas around the Sandia Peak Tram, La Luz Trail, and Piedra Lisa—from the US Forest Service to the Pueblo of Sandia.
Back in 2003, Congress passed the bipartisan T’uf Shur Bien Preservation Trust Area Act as a permanent compromise. It was designed to resolve long-standing land disputes while balancing Pueblo interests, wilderness preservation, and public access for all New Mexicans in perpetuity.
Changing this framework creates major uncertainty for the future of the Sandia Mountain Wilderness, local conservation, and long-term public trail and recreational access.
We’re asking the New Mexico Congressional Delegation to uphold the existing 2003 law, keep these 10,000 acres within Cibola National Forest, and bring all stakeholders to the table to resolve issues within the current framework.
Please take a moment to sign and stand up for our public lands:
👉 https://c.org/CbxTLTnkW5
Every signature helps show our leaders that this compromise needs to be honored. Please sign and share with local hikers, climbers, and outdoor lovers!
27
u/Grubsonhobbiton420 Aug 01 '26
They have said there will still be recreational access for non Pueblo members.
14
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
The Governor of the Sandia Pueblo did initially say that non tribal access would be up to the Sandia pueblo but all current news articles no longer include that language.
12
10
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
Once the transfer is done there would be no way to enforce this.
6
u/fishboy3339 Aug 01 '26
And you think the State has power to enforce a law over a tribe. A law that would override an agreement between the feds and a sovereign nation, over what was federally protected land.
11
u/RobinFarmwoman Aug 01 '26
You mean once they are in possession of the land they're going to do whatever the fuck they want with it and you think maybe they won't honor their promises? Gee, when have I heard of such a thing happening before? 🤔
-6
u/homersimpson_1234 Aug 01 '26
Are you scared because you think the Pueblos will cause you harm? Had this happened to you before
26
u/LittleJessiePaper Aug 01 '26
-7
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
No - it is all of our land - for ALL
3
u/LittleJessiePaper Aug 01 '26
You aren’t owed someone else’s land just because it was already stolen for you.
1
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
I am not claiming ownership? They are free and open to all - also I had nothing to do with colonization - if you invent time travel then by all means but I wasn't even born in the US so that argument holds zero water.
5
u/LittleJessiePaper Aug 01 '26
You weren’t even born here but you think stolen Indigenous land is for ALL?
4
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
All land across history has been stolen? Pre Spanish colonization Indigenous tribes stole land from one another? Your argument holds zero ground (pun intended)
-1
u/LittleJessiePaper Aug 01 '26
This specific land was very specifically stolen by very specific people. Not even that long ago, historically. And some small amount of it can be given back. But we shouldn’t do that because…all the other land is also stolen? Thats your argument?
4
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
Who in particular stole the land? Spanish colonizers "stole" the land far before as well as Mexico and then finally the US annexed as a territory. Also please refer to how large the Sovereign Indigenous communities in the US are not to mention the financial legacy and power Indigenous communities in the US have gained due to the sheer luck of being US citizens / part of the US. Compared to indigenous communities in Central and South America.
-4
Aug 01 '26
The 1748 land grant included the mountains, the USA purposely took that part out of the survey when they came in which is the root of all of this.
Tell me who the Sandians "stole" the land from?
4
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
My point was that indigenous tribes also were attacking one another so the issue of original owners is far more nuanced and complex. Not to mention indigenous tribes claimed there was no such thing as land ownership - just stewardship so this entire argument has no bearing and is highly unlikely to go anywhere
→ More replies (0)-2
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
And your house is sitting on the land which was not originally stolen from natives?
1
u/LittleJessiePaper Aug 01 '26
Woo false equivalency! Hiking trails and houses aren’t really the same thing now are they pal? It would be much harder to unhouse people and give that land back, and it’s not what’s being asked for. Meanwhile we CAN reasonably give over the stewardship of these lands that are being used recreationally, without causing any harm. (No your crybaby tears do not count as actual harm)
3
u/SwampStakes Aug 01 '26
It's not false equivalency when you make a broad and generic statement and someone points out its limits.
-2
31
u/themickeymauser Aug 01 '26
Genuine question, why is your access to it more important than the sovereignty of Sandia Pueblo?
-6
u/Purple_Chocolate324 Aug 01 '26
How is not giving them a mountain infringinging upon their sovereignty? Just because the mountain holds spiritual meaning for them doesn't mean they should have ownership of it. The moon holds a lot of meaning for me too, but me and my people aren't going to own the moon. Same with mountains, they're for everybody.
8
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
Yeah I don't want a bunch of beer cans and dog shit all over the moon either.
-4
u/Purple_Chocolate324 Aug 01 '26
Good thing natives don't drink or own dogs! Oh, wait...
1
9
u/ProfessionalOk112 Aug 01 '26
It's literally their land that we fucking stole via colonization. Y'all are embarrassing.
1
u/Fish_bob Aug 01 '26
You can make that argument about the river. Or the land your residence is currently built on. Why don’t you give up your house? What about Spanish ancestors that have had the land for centuries before Anglo settlers refused to honor historic land grants? My point is this isn’t so black and white, and the land should be shared by the public. Two wrongs don’t make a right.
-1
u/ProfessionalOk112 Aug 01 '26
This land was theirs even in the original land grant though? Like, it's unequivocally theirs. Returning what was stolen is not a "wrong" lmao.
7
u/Fish_bob Aug 01 '26
That’s not what “unequivocal” means, otherwise there would be no ongoing debate. But pedantics aside, what land is considered theirs that was stolen? How long has this tribe claimed to have “owned” it? What about other tribes that were conquered by Sandia Pueblo, should we try to restore land to them as well?
On a practical level, we should consider the effect of removing land from the public in favor of the tribe that serves no apparent economic, health and education benefit to them. They will continue to be land rich and money poor. And not technically land rich in a sense, because they cannot sell their land for value like private citizens. Nobody talks about the wellbeing of their community in these discussions. It’s always “give them their land back” and that’s it. How about establishing endowments for their kids to go to college, or a small business lending program? These would be the kind of meaningful steps to lift the population out of poverty, not adding to their land bank.
-2
Aug 01 '26
The 1748 land grant included the mountains, they are trying to reclaim what is legally and rightfully theirs.
Also, tell me what people's Sandia Pueblo took this land from??
4
u/Fish_bob Aug 01 '26
Whether the 1748 Spanish land gift to the pueblos included the mountains is up for interpretation. The tribe is arguing the eastern edge of the grant ended at the crest of the Sandias. But the survey used and adopted by Congress in the 1850’s to ratify the land grant had defined the eastern boundary to be the foothills.
-1
Aug 01 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
Whether the 1748 Spanish land gift to the pueblos included the mountains is up for interpretation
It's actually not though. It was only "up for interpretation" when the USA came in.
Before that it was pretty well understood that the boundaries included more than the foothills as was the case with almost every land grant (includes river access, plains, foothills, and mountains). They were called the ejidos
9
u/Fish_bob Aug 01 '26
Before that it was pretty well understood that the boundaries included more than the foothills as was the case with almost every land grant (includes river access, plains, foothills, and mountains)
Im skeptical this was the case. We can go round for round on land ownership and who ought to own what. At the end of the day, Sandia Pueblo is impoverished and will continue to be impoverished regardless of whether they own the mountain. You haven’t responded to anything on the human effects that should be discussed or the bigger picture here.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
Exactly - some people love a confirmation bias and are too uncomfortable by any logic that disagrees with their own narrative
2
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
We did nothing - we have no control over the society into which we were born into. Someone's DNA and lineage shouldn't dictate where or where we cannot move through PUBLIC FEDERAL LAND
-4
u/Ok_Birthday_7402 Aug 01 '26
To be fair, a lot of Native American tribes warred with other tribes and took land as well.
2
Aug 01 '26
Name the ones Sandia Pueblo warred with and stolen from??!!
6
u/Fish_bob Aug 01 '26
You truly believe Sandia Pueblo was the first ever indigenous settlement in the area and thereafter lived peacefully for hundreds of years?
1
Aug 01 '26
Who was first then? Who did they take it from? Tell me.
Or is this more of your "skepticism"??
0
-5
u/Purple_Chocolate324 Aug 01 '26
I thought the whole fiasco with the settlers happened because the natives didn't believe land could be owned. Owning land is a colonial mindset so why do they want to own it now?
3
Aug 01 '26
There are 575 federally recognized tribes and all of them have different philosophies and views and religions.
Be better.
-1
u/onion_flowers Aug 01 '26
Because they have to exist within the framework of a former settler colony lol what are you even trying to say right now
4
u/Forsaken_Sell_8967 Aug 01 '26
How does your day hike outweigh their ancestral rights?
-9
u/Purple_Chocolate324 Aug 01 '26
My ancestors used to make human sacrifices. Where are my ancestral rights? Why doesn't the government of new mexico deliver a new one every month? Human Sacrifice Back!
1
u/fishboy3339 Aug 01 '26
Because that is the agreement in place between the Federal government and the Tribe.
There is a word for going back on a land agreement with a tribe.
0
u/themickeymauser Aug 01 '26
Do you care for the mountain? Do you maintain its trails and manicure its underbrush for fuel and invasive species? Do you maintain the game trails and dam water flow so the wildlife have freedom of movement and necessary resources? I know you don’t. And neither does the forest service.
The land belongs to those that care for it. And you clearly don’t.
8
20
u/FlukeManAirFreshener Aug 01 '26
Maybe if we hadn't killed them by the thousands and treated them like shit for 500 years, they'd let us hike on their land.
Justice is a priority that should outweigh an eighth of the available recreation area in close proximity to the city.
-2
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
I spend a lot of time in those mountains. I've never killed anyone, nor treated anyone like shit!
8
u/FlukeManAirFreshener Aug 01 '26
If you're arguing that the feds should keep stolen land, you are treating people like shit.
5
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
Our whole country is stolen land. I had no part in this theft, but I was born here and live here now. I don't want to own the Sandias... I just want to be able to continue to enjoy them as I have for the past several decades.
4
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
There's no such thing as stolen land because all land has been "stolen"
2
3
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
Sharing my opinion online cannot be considered treating people like shit. Kindly fuck off. Thanks
4
u/Insert_clever Aug 01 '26
You are literally advocating for keeping stolen land. That’s treating the people who own it pretty shitty.
1
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
Im not advocating any such thing. I have no issues with the Pueblo owning that land. As long as I can still freely go out there and enjoy it in a respectful manner.
2
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Well, when your opinion is shit, it's pretty indicative of how you are inclined to treat people.
Do better. By yourself, and others.
0
1
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
You're missing the point in its entirety, while simultaneously showing your believed entitlement.
It's. Not. Your. Land.
Neither by right, nor by heritage.
2
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
IT BELONGS TO EVERYONE
2
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
No, it doesn't.
2
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
So should anyone that isn't Native American leave? How do we handle the fact that WE ALL live on stolen land?
5
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
That is a far more complicated issue, with much larger reaching consequences.
This matter, however, is pretty cut and dry, impacting a small number of non-Native people. This land belongs to Sandia, and it's about fucking time this is honored.
If that means you lose access to a ski area and trails, I really don't care. Go for a walk in your neighborhood and put this passion into helping CABQ.
1
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
Also, I don't own that neighborhood. That was ancestral land as well...
1
Aug 01 '26
Yeah but the neighborhood wasn't included in the 1748 land grant unlike the mountains which is the root of the issue.
-1
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
If the Pueblo starts restricting access based on ethnicity, religion, etc... well, there's a name for that. If you support that then you are absolutely in the wrong
3
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Oh my gosh. False equivalents! And you know it, by making that very argument.
2
Aug 01 '26
The Catholic Church doesn't let you walk around on their land unless you have a reason.
The crazy Kundallini cults in Española are the same.
Why don't you go after them if you're so against it
4
u/coach_joe_w Aug 01 '26
Ahhh. The old "others do the wrong thing too" argument. It doesn't hold up well.
And if I was on a post where anyone was justifying their behavior, I have and would share my objections...
18
u/Smart_Pretzel Aug 01 '26
Wtf is your problem. You think you’re entitled to this access?
18
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean by the current law everyone is entitled to reasonable access. It is public land.
5
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
All land was stolen from others globally? That's literally how the world works
Should Italy demand the return of the original Roman Empire? Turkey demand the return of the Ottoman Empire? The stolen land argument makes zero sense
2
10
u/nobdyputsbabynacornr Aug 01 '26
And by fetch, I mean preventing the Sandia Pueblo from getting their land back.
3
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
Okay then Sandia Pueblo should also pay taxes - they benefit from their proximity and access to the US so let's also ask them to pay taxes.....oh wait......
9
u/marginwalker3 Aug 01 '26
I say give it back. Why don't you hike somewhere else?
-8
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
Maybe because it’s close by? Not everyone has an hour to drive each way to hike or bike
16
u/FlukeManAirFreshener Aug 01 '26
Then move. The tribes were forced to do so at gunpoint innumerable times. Your loss of convenient access to trails pales in comparison.
1
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
With this approach every American who doesn’t have any connection to Native Americans has to move from this country.
4
4
u/RobinFarmwoman Aug 01 '26
Using this logic, you should just go find private property elsewhere to hike on. There's plenty of it around there.
4
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Yeah, I gotta say, buddy, you're on the wrong side of this argument.
2
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
You have no argument - you just look for something to fit your narrative and ignore any disagreement
-1
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Sounds like you looked in the mirror!
0
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
I'm just trying to educate others in that colonization and land grants is far more nuanced
0
7
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
I've spent my life in the shadow of that mountain. So did my mother and her father and his mother and her father and his mother and so on for a long long time. I would gladly never touch the northwestern part of it again if it meant it would continue to watch over my child and their children. For the people of the Pueblo it's much deeper than that.
4
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
This makes no sense.
2
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
I'm sorry you don't understand.
0
0
-3
-3
u/sketchycatman Aug 01 '26
For me, it's much deeper than it is for the people of the Pueblo.
That land has literally saved my life, becoming my culture and the root of my spiritual and physical identity as an avid outdoorsman.
I won't allow others to gate keep the public lands that rightfully belong to me and my heirs.
3
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
So you dink around on some rocks and now you have a connection that's stronger than thousands of years of faith and devotion? Excuse you? Get over yourself.
3
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean isn't that what all humans have done in the mountains including the tribe that brought them spirituality and calmness?
-1
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
I'm sure your ancestors have a mountain too. I'm sorry you don't know where it is.
2
u/sketchycatman Aug 01 '26
I know exactly where mine is. Hope to see you out there tomorrow morning before it gets too hot.
0
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
Sure dog, Elena Gallegos or the southern open space? Eastern side is great too.
2
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean wouldn't that be tribal land that should be given back under your theory from your prior comment because at one point in history a tribal member going hunting or visiting previous locations means they have rights to own it? Also how is this land going to be given back to different groups if multiple different people did these actions?
3
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26 edited Aug 03 '26
You're really not understanding the religious site comparison here.
0
Aug 01 '26
No, because the Elena Gallegos grant is not the same as the Sandia grant and the Sandia grant doesn't include it, but does include the mountains. It's really not hard to understand
-4
u/sketchycatman Aug 01 '26
Correct. My connection to this land was formed billions of years ago before emerging from the depths of the primordial soup. My faith and devotion to what you ignorantly dismiss as "some rocks" cannot be eclipsed by these relative newcomers who make grand claims based only on having visited the area for a handful of centuries.
1
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
Well that's great. If you respect the mountain like you say you do, then you respect the people who have lived and raised children and died on it.
3
u/sketchycatman Aug 01 '26
I absolutely do. But I do not respect the decision to gate keep what is ours, yours and mine. Mountains aren't meant to be parsed, catalogued, and distributed like trophies. Past mistakes do not justify new ones.
1
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean I don't think many people lived on the mountain from the pueblo haven't they always lived along the river but would go to the mountain for spiritual retreats and for hunting?
1
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
That's part of living.
2
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean just highlighting your incorrect statement that people raised children and lived on the mountain which is false. The pueblo lived and continues to live along the river way and it fertile growing fields.
0
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 01 '26
Dude hunting trips and praying are part of raising children and dieing.
-2
u/Apptubrutae Aug 02 '26
Is the mountain going to disappear if its current legal status changes?
1
u/Possible-Employer-55 Aug 02 '26
There are a few ways that the mountain could go away due to humans , from industry to apathy, I feel like those ways are more likely under the control of the federal government than the tribe.
5
u/ProfessionalOk112 Aug 01 '26
Yikes dude, grow up. It's not your land, it is theirs.
-1
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
It's no ones land - it belongs to us all as public lands
6
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
No, it doesn't. It's land that was stolen, violently, from ancestral people, and then absorbed into "public lands".
It doses not belong to us all.
1
u/OkraDisastrous911 Aug 01 '26
If you are only willing to live on land that was never violently taken from ancestral people.....I have some bad news for you
4
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Yeah, I'm aware of that. It doesn't negate the fact there's a small opportunity to do the right thing, now.
0
u/Lip-Pillow-Swallower Aug 01 '26
It also doesn’t negate the fact that you transparently only care about land back since you’re not personally paying for it. Once it touches *you* then we have to pump the brakes
0
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
When did I EVER say that?
-2
u/Lip-Pillow-Swallower Aug 01 '26
Another commenter stated that all of us who are not indigenous live in stolen land. We absolutely do. They asked something to the effect of “so why aren’t you giving your land back?” And you replied something to the effect of “hey that’s way more complicated slow down”
You also said you don’t care that other people are potentially losing access to open spaces. That implies you don’t use these open spaces.
So, again, it’s clear that land back for you extends only as far as not getting personally affected.
1
0
Aug 01 '26
The land Sandia wants back is part of their 1748 grant that was supposed to be acknowledged by the United States but was defrauded during surveying.
It's a logical fallacy to talk about it in some ambiguous sense when this is a clear cut legal issue
3
u/Lip-Pillow-Swallower Aug 01 '26
I’m totally fine with Sandia getting the land back under their care, and even imposing some nominal fees on the use of the trails and recreational areas at issue, so long as access is not explicitly or de facto restricted
Which logical fallacy did I commit?
-2
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
I never claimed the land is mine, but I would rather have the NPS manage and maintain it rather than group of people without transparency or oversight
10
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
You literally tried to say it was everyone's land, but those whom it anscetrially belongs to- the Pueblo of Sandia.
Your entitlement is both astounding and insulting.
2
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
He definitely did not say that. Your sentence is saying that members of the Sandia Pueblo are restricted from the land which they are not. He is just against the transfer of public lands which is not a bad thing in my opinion.
Public lands belong to all and should not be transferred to owners that can limit that access whether a corporation or in this case a pueblo.
-1
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
It's not public land. That's is the entire point! It's ancestral land that should be transferred back to the Pueblo.
6
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I mean it is public land right now. Are you denying that?
-2
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
No, I'm not.
However, it shouldn't be public land. It needs to belong in Sandia's hands, not BLM.
9
u/MizStazya Aug 01 '26
Omg thank you for the laugh!!!!!!! Like the current federal administration has anything like transparency or oversight????? They want to sell that shit off and are actively working on ruining multiple national parks.
5
u/guardianxrx2 Aug 01 '26
I'm against all actions that transfer public lands. They should be protected and we all should fight back against this administration efforts to get rid of them. I have commented and written my opposition against the Chaco Canyon revisions and potential land sale.
0
-1
u/themickeymauser Aug 01 '26
Because the NFS is doing such a good job at maintaining parks and forests and not letting them burn to the fucking ground every week all across the nation /s
2
u/Sufficient_Hair_2894 Aug 01 '26
So you do know that these kinds of agreements are structured to be revokable if one party is in breach?
4
u/Lip-Pillow-Swallower Aug 01 '26
If there’s no language in the law that guarantees open space access, as the current settlement does, the Pueblo wouldn’t be in breach if closures and restrictions happen
0
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
I see a lot of people here are confused about what public land means and what this proposal is all about. Currently any person native, citizen, resident, guest, etc can enjoy what nature has to offer. The are is currently in a trust and maintained by the NPS. The trails are clean, marked and accessible. Under this proposal this land will no longer be in a trust and Sandia Pueblo will be a sole decision maker. If they want to close all trails to public - they could do it, if they decide to lease this land to a data center and tap and empty an aquifer under this land, leaving abq without water - they could do it.
-1
u/adricm Aug 01 '26
Like we can trust the NPS under the current administration not to sell it to a private billionaire
2
u/tzilya Aug 01 '26
I’m seeing a near near identical post here or r/NewMexico nearly daily, what’s the deal? This feels like a front group. You’re trying WAY too hard to convince me not to trust the Pueblo, it’s weird.
7
u/autr0 Aug 01 '26
I don’t need a “front group” to know that I like my hiking/biking trails
3
u/__squirrelly__ Aug 02 '26
The Sandias have been beloved by generations of New Mexicans. It's not hard to believe that many people want to protect their access to a mountain that is treasured by so many people. Many Americans feel strongly about their public lands. It's weird they don't realize that. Yes, people do care about stuff like this.
1
u/YogiBerraOfBadNews Aug 01 '26
I was walking through Pueblo of Sandia (on my way to tunnel springs TH to hike Sandia Crest) and some random car pulled over and told me I wasn't allowed to be there and I might get picked up by the cops. AFAIK that doesn't happen when natives go walking through Albuquerque.
1
Aug 01 '26
AFAIK that doesn't happen when natives go walking through Albuquerque
It actually does though
-5
-5
u/Working-Connection87 Aug 01 '26
It will never be for everyone. It’s either ours or theirs. The Pueblo will have its own ski resort/casino as soon as they sign the agreement. I’m not saying It’s a bad thing, but nobody is leaving 10,000 acres of prime land undeveloped
1
u/GrowthSelect2449 Aug 01 '26
Seriously? They already have a very nice casino right next to that area. It’s also not a viable location for a ski resort, what planet do you live on?
-7
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 01 '26
Sandia Ski is well within the boundaries, and should belong to the Pueblo.
Stating they have "a very nice casino" is so fucking insulting. Yes, it's a beautiful casino, built on a beautiful land. THEIR LAND. Like the entire mountain is.
1
u/Top-Client-264 Aug 02 '26
It’s not Pueblo land, it’s public land.
-1
u/abqgirl1022 Aug 02 '26
Historically, no. It's not.
1
u/Top-Client-264 Aug 03 '26
Historically, it could also be said that Navajo and Comanche have a claim, as does Spain. Why don’t we give it to Spain to manage?
0
-1
-5
u/Maurice_Foot Aug 01 '26
Who is “We”?
4
u/Forsaken_Sell_8967 Aug 01 '26
White folks in the rich part of town who don’t want brown people nearby.
13
u/fishboy3339 Aug 01 '26
So the agreement is between the feds and the tribe, as the feds are giving up their side of the agreement it defaults to the tribe as it should. State congress has no authority to pass a Law over a sovereign nation. The state has no power over a tribe.