[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Real Monetary Reform

More Young Men Are Now Religious Than Women In The US

0,000+ online influencers, journalists, drive-by media, TV stars and writers work for State Department

"Why Are We Hiding It From The Public?" - Five Takeaways From Congressional UFO Hearing

Food Additives Exposed: What Lies Beneath America's Food Supply

Scott Ritter: Hezbollah OBLITERATES IDF, Netanyahu in deep legal trouble

Vivek Ramaswamy says he and Elon Musk are set up for 'mass deportations' of millions of 'unelected bureaucrats'

Evidence Points to Voter Fraud in 2024 Wisconsin Senate Race

Rickards: Your Trump Investment Guide

Pentagon 'Shocked' By Houthi Arsenal, Sophistication Is 'Getting Scary'

Cancer Starves When You Eat These Surprising Foods | Dr. William Li

Megyn Kelly Gets Fiery About Trump's Choice of Matt Gaetz for Attorney General

Over 100 leftist groups organize coalition to rebuild morale and resist MAGA after Trump win

Mainstream Media Cries Foul Over Musk Meeting With Iran Ambassador...On Peace

Vaccine Stocks Slide Further After Trump Taps RFK Jr. To Lead HHS; CNN Outraged

Do Trump’s picks Rubio, Huckabee signal his approval of West Bank annexation?

Pac-Man

Barron Trump

Big Pharma-Sponsored Vaccinologist Finally Admits mRNA Shots Are Killing Millions

US fiscal year 2025 opens with a staggering $257 billion October deficit$3 trillion annual pace.

His brain has been damaged by American processed food.

Iran willing to resolve doubts about its atomic programme with IAEA

FBI Official Who Oversaw J6 Pipe Bomb Probe Lied About Receiving 'Corrupted' Evidence “We have complete data. Not complete, because there’s some data that was corrupted by one of the providers—not purposely by them, right,” former FBI official Steven D’Antuono told the House Judiciary Committee in a

Musk’s DOGE Takes To X To Crowdsource Talent: ‘80+ Hours Per Week,’

Female Bodybuilders vs. 16 Year Old Farmers

Whoopi Goldberg announces she is joining women in their sex abstinence

Musk secretly met with Iran's UN envoy NYT

D.O.G.E. To have a leaderboard of most wasteful government spending

In Most U.S. Cities, Social Security Payments Last Married Couples Just 19 Days Or Less

Another major healthcare provider files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy


Immigration
See other Immigration Articles

Title: Land-grant movement After decades of inaction, fight is gaining traction ( to Mexican heirs )
Source: The New Mexican
URL Source: http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/13767.html
Published: May 22, 2005
Author: Ben Neary | The New Mexican
Post Date: 2005-05-22 19:18:00 by robin
Keywords: Land-grant, inaction,, movement
Views: 95
Comments: 15

Momentum is building to transfer federal lands in New Mexico to the heirs of Spanish and Mexican land grants.

Descendants of families who received government grants of land before New Mexico was annexed to the United States say that's the only way to correct injustices caused when their ancestors lost control of some of their properties.

While the prospect of fencing off forests and streams now open to the public riles many who aren't land-grant heirs, Gov. Bill Richardson and the New Mexico Legislature are urging Congress to transfer lands from the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management to land-grant heirs.

Spokesmen for U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and other members of the state's congressional delegation say they still haven't decided how to address the long-simmering land-grant situation.

But they say they intend to begin focusing on the issue in coming weeks and possibly draft legislation by this summer.

Using only cash to resolve the dispute is not a viable political option for land-grant activists who say their culture is tied to the land.

"Our No. 1 priority is land," Juan Sanchez, board of trustees president for the Chilili Land Grant southeast of Albuquerque, said recently. "We want the land."

A contentious history

The issues has roots in New Mexico's Spanish-colonial past, when Spain's royal government granted ownership of land to individuals or to entire communities, which used the land for such activities as grazing and wood gathering.

The government of Mexico continued the practice of issuing land grants after the country gained its independence in 1821.

Millions of acres were granted by Spain and Mexico to encourage settlement in what is now the American Southwest. Then came war with the United States.

Under the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican War, the U.S. government pledged to respect private property in the New Mexico Territory, including land grants.

However, heirs to Spanish and Mexican land grants have claimed for decades that the U.S. government failed to live up to its obligations.

Last year, the U.S. General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress, released a controversial study that upheld the federal government's procedures for reviewing land-grant claims in territorial days.

The GAO concluded the government had afforded land-grant heirs due process in the 1800s and said there is no legal obligation for Congress to do anything to address the land-grant situation.

Yet the GAO also concluded the grant-confirmation process was inefficient and created hardship for land-grant heirs. Accordingly, the investigators listed options that Congress could pursue to address the situation if it chose to, ranging from a simple apology to the possibility of cash reparations or actual transfer of federal lands.

In 1999, when Domenici got the GAO to undertake the study, he said he expected it could result in millions of acres of federal land being transferred to land-grant heirs.

This year, the state Legislature passed a memorial calling on Congress to create a trust fund for land-grant heirs or initiate "a program of land exchanges to allow for recovery of land by the community land grants."

Finding answers

Despite the GAO's finding of due process, Richardson says, he supports transferring federal land to heirs. "Because even though they may have been given due process, I believe it was a very weak due process," the governor, a former Northern New Mexico congressman, said in a recent interview. "Just because somebody was given due process doesn't mean that they were not victimized."

Richardson also said a lot of land-grant families have never been given suitable explanations as to how they lost land. "That's always been my fundamental view as I approach the land-grant issue: Give the land-grant families a reason why their land was taken," he said. "And secondly, the compensation issue has, in my judgment, never been addressed."

Since the state Legislature's Land Grant Interim Committee first convened in 2003, lawmakers have passed legislation that Richardson has signed into law recognizing land grants as political subdivisions of the state. That makes land grants eligible for both state and federal money.

This past session, the Legislature approved about $700,000 for projects on land grants around the state, including $250,000 that Richardson earmarked from his share of capital-outlay money for economic-development planning.

Letter of the law

Richardson said he's concerned the federal government has been too legalistic about the land-grant issue. "The federal government would say, 'Give us the deeds; give us the paper,' " Richardson said. "Well, these are very humble families, and in those days, your word was your bond. There weren't computers or water studies, so that was kind of a disingenuous argument."

Richardson said it's possible Congress could create a trust fund for land grants and pass legislation to transfer federal land to land grants within the next five to 10 years.

The state government and New Mexico's congressional delegation this year "should pursue these in Congress," he said.

Noting that he intends to meet soon with congressional representatives concerning the land-grant issue, Richardson said: "There's still plenty of time. The appropriations process hasn't started yet."

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: robin (#0)

Descendants of families who received government grants of land before New Mexico was annexed to the United States say that's the only way to correct injustices caused when their ancestors lost control of some of their properties.

"Our No. 1 priority is land," Juan Sanchez, board of trustees president for the Chilili Land Grant southeast of Albuquerque, said recently. "We want the land."

What a crock.. of course they will get the land.. I have no doubt about it whatsoever.. sounding more and more like Zimbabwe..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-05-22   19:41:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Zipporah (#1)

You know, I'd rather see the land go to the heirs, instead of being held by fedgov.

Governments have NO BUSINESS owning land.

Lod  posted on  2005-05-22   19:51:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: lodwick (#2)

I dont disagree re the feds.. My question are these people American citizens? Are we going to give US land to foreigners due to land grants prior to it being a part of the US? This is nuts..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-05-22   19:55:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: robin (#0)

There's a body of law to take care of this. The doctrine of adverse possession. If these people brought an action to correct the situation within the applicable time period, i.e, 5, 10 or sometimes 20 years, then they have a right to prove that the land is really theirs and is being held by an adverse party.

If they didn't do this, they should be SOL. Otherwise the argument about who really owns the land goes back to Adam and Eve.

You see this everyday with fences and property lines. If somebody builds a fence in good faith and it stands for 90 years, and then a GPS survey determines that it sits on the neighbors land, the fence and property line probably remain where they are.

Likewise if a property is transfered in good faith by a party who doesn't really hold fee title, and if the bonafide purchaser then occupies the land for 60 years, an heir to the real owner can't suddenly show up and kick the purchaser off. The doctrine of adverse possession prevents this.

crack monkey  posted on  2005-05-22   20:10:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Zipporah (#3)

I dont disagree re the feds.. My question are these people American citizens? Are we going to give US land to foreigners due to land grants prior to it being a part of the US? This is nuts..

If the Mexicans make a good argument for getting the land, there's no reason the Indians can't use the same argument to kick the Mexicans off. That's why there are statutes of limitations on these things.

crack monkey  posted on  2005-05-22   20:12:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: crack monkey (#5)

If the Mexicans make a good argument for getting the land, there's no reason the Indians can't use the same argument to kick the Mexicans off. That's why there are statutes of limitations on these things.

True.. And Im sure these people will get the full support of the legislators..

Zipporah  posted on  2005-05-22   20:16:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: crack monkey (#4)

CM, that all sounds very reasonable. I hope reason prevails, but Richardson sounds determined.

robin  posted on  2005-05-22   21:16:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: crack monkey, all here (#4)

Thanks for reminding me of what I should have said - Adverse possession rules, rule...in Texas, obvious and open possession rules kick in after only seven, not sixty years.

Check your fence lines, folks.

Lod  posted on  2005-05-22   21:25:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: robin (#0)

However, heirs to Spanish and Mexican land grants have claimed for decades that the U.S. government failed to live up to its obligations.

Gee, that's a surprise. Maybe they could team up with the Indians...

Sure would be interesting, though, to have Mexican land owners complaining about illegals ruining their land.

Indrid Cold  posted on  2005-05-23   1:23:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: OKCSubmariner, Itisa1mosttoolate, Dakmar, Don, Grumble Jones, h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, 1776, justlurking (#0)

ping!

robin  posted on  2005-05-23   15:00:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: robin (#0)

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHHA

You see, this is the first step towards the disassembly of the United States. You can kiss Arizona, California, New Mexico and hopefully Texas goodbye within 10 years.

Once those states are gone, it will only be a matter of time til the Mexican Government annexes everything west of the Mississippi.

TommyTheMadArtist  posted on  2005-05-23   17:54:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: crack monkey (#5)

If the Mexicans make a good argument for getting the land, there's no reason the Indians can't use the same argument to kick the Mexicans off.

Hee hee hee hee hee. Now THAT would be poetic justice.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-05-24   9:28:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: robin, crack monkey (#7)

Richardson sounds determined.

I don't think Richardson will get all (maybe not any) of what he says he wants here, Robin. His arguments are very weak. "Weak" due process?? Such a thing is not recognized in our law. Either it is deemed due process, or it is not.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-05-24   9:31:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: crack monkey, All (#13)

I once read of a case in which someone very, very, elaborately faked documents which purported to show their ancestor was the holder of some Spanish land grant out west somewhere (may have been in NM, in fact I think it was.)

Has anyone else ever heard of such a case? Whatever it was, I believe it was a newsmaker in its time.

h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t  posted on  2005-05-24   9:35:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: h-a-l-f-w-i-t-t, crack monkey (#12)

If the Mexicans make a good argument for getting the land, there's no reason the Indians can't use the same argument to kick the Mexicans off.

Hee hee hee hee hee. Now THAT would be poetic justice.

Bad Eagle 'Don't Burn My Flag' "F—K YOU, this is still Mexico," says a popular LED-illuminated sign appearing in car windows on California highways.

The sign refers to the fact that much of the American Southwest belonged to Mexico until the U.S. siezed it in 1846.

Now some Mexicans want the land back. As a Comanche Indian, I have a problem with that.

We Comanches pushed the Spaniards out of Texas and eastern New Mexico over 200 years ago. Neither Spaniards nor Mexicans ever managed to return.

....

If push comes to shove, I’ll be standing with the Anglos this time. One thing whites and Indians have in common: We respect the American flag.

robin  posted on  2005-05-24   9:59:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]