Dan Kildee: “I do think that we could really create a legal situation here without knowing the consequences of the amendment. Now…”

“I do think that we could really create a legal situation here without knowing the consequences of the amendment. Now, Congress, back in 1968, recognizing that in certain areas, the 14th amendment, by the way, says ``States'' shall not do certain things. So they wrote the Indian Civil Rights Act of 1968. That was written very, very carefully by both Houses. The great constitutional attorney Senator Sam Irwin played a major role in that, and they carved out how the basic rights contained within the fifth and the 14th amendment would apply on Indian tribes. It's a well-done bill. And had we had the chance to discuss this in committee, perhaps we could have reached some agreement; I'm not sure. But I'm very concerned about adopting anything without knowing the consequences when it took them months, in 1968, to craft the Indian Civil Rights Act. It's a two-page bill, and it really enumerates pretty well the fifth amendment and the 14th amendment. So, at this time, I think that we would be treading on rather dangerous territory to have the courts have to look at, first of all, the Constitution, the treaties, the 14th amendment and the Flake amendment and decide where they conflict, which one to apply. So, despite your sincerity, I wish we had discussed this in committee, perhaps we could have arrived at some remedy there. But here I think we're going to create a lawyer's delight.”