Local leaders find experience exciting
Jan. 12, 2005

R. PATRICK CORBETT
Observer-Dispatch

AT THE SCENE At 10 a.m. Tuesday an electronic -- but dignified -- signal rang in the courtroom of the U.S. Supreme Court. Eight associate justices -- Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist is excused as he battles cancer -- emerged through plush curtains rising to the vaulted ceiling. Throughout the proceedings, marshals patrolled the packed courtroom to ensure decorum in the hallowed chambers. Ira S. Sacks, lawyer for the city of Sherrill, was first to present his client's case, standing at a podium before the justices. Caitlin J. Halligan, solicitor general for New York state, followed him for 10 minutes to support Sherrill's position. At 10:30, Michael Smith, representing the Oneida Indian Nation, stood before the justices. Malcolm L. Stewart, assistant to the U.S. Solicitor General, got the final 10 minutes to try to bolster the Indians' case.

WASHINGTON, D.C. —Oneida County Legislator William Croll of Vernon knew before he entered the U.S. Supreme Court building across from the U.S. Capitol that it would be a memorable day.

He wasn't alone.

He said he and other Oneida County officials were nervously joking about the importance of the event Monday, but when they woke up Tuesday, "You could see a change of attitude in them this morning."

On the walk from his hotel to the court, Croll took photos of the delegation with the nearby Capitol dome towering over them, "so my son believes me," he said with a laugh.

After the one-hour hearing, Croll said the experience was all he had expected. "It was fabulous."

Even Oneida Indian Nation Representative Ray Halbritter, a lawyer who has been involved in legal proceedings swirling around the Nation land claim most of his adult life, said he found it "very exciting."

Lenox Town Councilman Tony Palamara stood in line three hours to make sure he got a good seat.

"This is history," he said. "My family owns a number of parcels in the land-claim area."

The Supreme Court ruling on the Sherrill tax case could also set policy for the entire 270,000 acres of land in Madison and Oneida counties that the Oneida Nation claims was illegally taken from them, he said.

Charles Curtis was at the front of the line leading to the Supreme Court's marble steps. Curtis is the Wisconsin lawyer who wrote a brief for Madison County towns supporting the Sherrill case.

"I got here around 5:30 (a.m.)," he said. "I wasn't going to miss this."

After the hearing, Palamara savored the moment. "I was impressed by the justices (and) the questions they asked.

"They really challenged the attorneys (to defend their arguments)," he said. "The attorneys were well-prepared."

Madison County Board of Supervisors Chairman Rocco DiVeronica agreed that some of the justices seemed to be well read on the Indian tax question, but he added, "Some of them have to do more homework."

He said some justices asked what he thought were very elementary questions about the treaties and the Oneida land claim in Central New York.

Bernie Conklin, vice president of Upstate Citizens for Equality, a landowners' group opposed to Oneida Nation business practices, said he was particularly glad the justices asked Ira S. Sacks, lawyer for the city of Sherrill, why lawyers for Oneida and Madison counties failed to mention the Fort Schuyler and Buffalo Creek treaties when the Supreme Court heard the land claim argument in 1985 and decided that the Oneidas were entitled to pursue the matter.

Sherrill's lawyers contend the two treaties ended Oneida control over the land in question.

The landowners' group has long argued the land claim might have been stopped short if the state's lawyers had been better prepared 20 years ago. DiVeronica noted that the Supreme Court ruling would be "just about the tax case."

Contact R. Patrick Corbett at pcorbett@utica.gannett.com