Aside from a desire by some elitists to tell other people how to live, I can not see any reason whatsoever to block this casino.

I wish I had access to a time machine. Had I such access, I would take opponents of this casino for a drive on Valencia Road from Cardinal Avenue to Camino Verde in 1993, and then the same drive today. Casino of the Sun, and then Casino del Sol, have been nothing but good for that area. Not only is the Pascua-Yaqui nation self-sufficient, but the result has also been greatly improve infrastructure, and many improvements to the area both civic and private. The one and only negative thing that happened to that area is the installation of a revenue camera slightly west of Camino de la Tierra.

Dear Readers, these questions have never been asked by Arizona citizens or in any court.
U.S. Constitutional questions:
1.  “Where is the proclamation ratified by the voting citizenry of the U.S. that amends our U.S. Constitution making another U.S./Arizona citizen with “Indian ancestry/race” distinguishable because of their race?” 
2.  “Where is the proclamation ratified by the voting citizenry of the U.S. that amends Article I, Section 8 Clause 17 whereby the National govt. cantake land’ from the sovereign State of Arizona to give to a faux “Indian tribal government” to create a racial de jure legislative enclave in contravention of the U.S. Constitution in accordance with Leavenworth v. Lowe, 114 U.S. 525 (1885)?”
As of The Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, there are no more “Indians” within the original meaning of the United States Constitution…ONLY U.S./Arizona citizens with “Indian ancestry/race.” 
 
Osborn v. Bank of the United States, 22 U.S. 9 Wheat. 738 738 (1824) A naturalized citizen is indeed made a citizen under an act of Congress, but the act does not proceed to give, to regulate, or to prescribe his capacities. He becomes a member of the society, possessing all the rights of a native citizen, and standing, in the view of the Constitution, on the footing of a native. The Constitution does not authorize Congress to enlarge or abridge those rights. The simple power of the national legislature is to prescribe a uniform rule of naturalization, and the exercise of this power exhausts it so far as respects the individual. The Constitution then takes him up, and, among other rights, extends to him the capacity of suing in the courts of the United States precisely under the same circumstances under which a native might sue. He is distinguishable in nothing from a native citizen except so far as the Constitution makes the distinction. The law makes none.
Paul R. Jones
Federal Indian Programs Consultant and Researcher

Dear Bret Linden/Dylan Smith,
A careful re-read of my original post will show that there are no “Native Nations” under our U.S. Constitution Standards.  There are U.S./Arizona citizens with “Indian ancestry/Race” and they can call themselves any thing they like i.e. sovereign “Native Nations;” but, our U.S. Constitution Standards has no such thing.  U.S.C. Title 25: Indians-is an “Irregular Engineering Standards Change to the United States Constitution” (IERS) never ratified by the voting citizenry to amend our U.S. Constitution to make the health, welfare, safety and benefits of a select group of U.S./Arizona citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” distinguishable.  Our elected/appointed servants-Federal and State-are ‘tricking’ U.S. citizenry in the whole of federal Indian programs with fallacious logic on steroids.  There is absolutely nothing in our federal/state common law that has U.S. Constitution Standards authority to make any U.S./State citizen distinguishable from another citizen based on “Indian ancestry/race!”  I would ask you Bret Linden/Dylan Smith to present the citizen ratified proclamation making distinguishable U.S./Arizona citizens with “Indian ancestry/race” for the readers of TUCSON SENTINEL to review.  Cheers, Paul R. Jones

@Bret, I think Brittanicus may have found a friend.

Somebody needs to go read Article 1, Section 8, along with Johnson v. M’Intosh, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, Worcester v. Georgia, and Montana v. U.S.

Mr. Jones,

If you somehow believe that a law can override and/or change the Constitution, then you really don’t know what’s happening here.

OK, I finally tried to decode this guy’s rambling, incoherent posts. And, I have to agree with one thing he said…“Indians is a fraud”. Sure is. The only reason they’re referred to as “Indians” is because Christopher Columbus was an idiot and an asshole. I refuse to use that term, instead preferring “Native”. And, as anti-pc as I am, that means a lot.

That said, I can see nothing in those rambling diatribes that is relevant to the issue at hand. Nothing there legitimately explains how or why the Glendale casino should be blocked. In fact, I have yet to see anyone at all offer a good reason.

Who says it is about race? Technically, it could be. However, this is different. Any regular reader of my posts would tell you that I hate anyone being given any perk based on skin color, and in no case is that more true then when it comes to Raul Grijalva being handed a blatantly rigged district to he can continue his reign of terror in the halls of Congress.

However, this is different. It isn’t so much about color of skin than it is sovereignty of the land.

The U.S. Government has broken so many treaties with the Native peoples over the last two centuries that I doubt any historian could ever come up with an accurate count of how many. Since the government herded these tribes on to these reservations (in many cases being located to regions that particular nation had never been before), the least the government can do is leave them alone and let them do what they want, so long as they’re not hurting anyone else. If the nation was proposing a toxic waste storage facility then I would also be opposed. But, this casino isn’t going to hurt anyone.

I am a strong proponent of Native American sovereignty.

This casino would give the state a 5% cut of the take, another move I’m opposed to. But, there’s a few more million the idiot state government can mismanage. Doesn’t that make you happy?