Does text and meaning of Article (3) Treaty of February 27 1867 15 Stat. 53] between United States and Potawatomi Tribe of Indians remain valid

Questions Presented for Review Does text and meaning of Article (3) Treaty of February 27 1867 15 Stat. 53] between United States and Potawatomi Tribe of Indians stating inter alia; “Reservation”.shall never be included within the jurisdiction of any state ot territory” remain valid in full force and survive today (A) based on relevant promises and statements during Treaty negotiations to Tribe by United States representatives (B) In the sense or spirit which the Tribe understood it in 1867 under basic canons of liberal construction applicable to Indian Treaties (C) To cases of Indian character emanating within original geographical boundaries of : Treaty area under 28 U.S.C.A §1304; 18 U.S.C.A. § 1152; 18 US.C.A $1153 Jurisdictional Statement Court has jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1254 (1) which permits a writ of certiorari to be granted upon the petition of any party ; to any civil or criminal case before or after rendition of judgment or decree (i) Extra Jurisdictional Statement Jurisdiction over Treaty is proper in this court cause in Ex Parte Mayfield 11 S.Ct. 939 (1891) [T]his court has, held , however in a multitude of cases, that it had power to inquire, with regard to the jurisdiction the inferior of court, either in respect to the subject matter or the person, even if such inquiry involved an examination of facts outside of, but not inconsistent with the record’) [T]he faith of this nation having been pledged in the Treaties, the honor of the Nation demands; and the jurisdictional Act requires; that these long settled grievances be settled by this court in simple justice to a down trodden people” Northwestern Band of Shoshone Indians v. U.S. 65 S.Ct. 690 (1945) see Justice Douglas dissenting) . . [F]rom their very weakness and helplessness, so largely due to the course of ' dealing of the Federal government with them and the Treaties in which it has been promised there arises a duty of protection, and with it the power. This has always been recognized by the Executive and by Congress and by this court whenever the question has arisen” U.S. v. Kagama 118 U.S. 375 (1886) -~[ po. _ Statement of case Petition is brought pro se on behalf of all Indians similarly situated who’s criminal complaints emanate from within original exterior boundaries of Citizen ; Band Potawatomi Nations Treaty area. Oklahoma court of Criminal Appeals (OCCA) and local trial courts who have confronted issue have never determined whether reservation lines where erased or abolished , or applied Art. (3) Treaty text as understood by Tribe in . ' 1867,and erroneously determined entire Reservation was disestablished by text of © _ General Allotment Act of 1891 and have failed to follow Mc Girts mandate or applied Solem th the following issues stated herein, therefore Justice Neil Gorsuch’s guidance is requested | Reasons for granting Certiorari 1.) Citizen Band Potawatomi Nation (Tribe) ceded a portion of reservation : did not relinquish “...all tribal interest” McGirt 140 S.Ct. at 2463 (2020) and since . 1867 has consistently maintained allotments, then Trust Land and a resilient presence within original historic reservation boundaries that were never erased or abolished by Congress with “clear and explicit language” or intent and continues today to appear in “Tribal Jurisdictional” Maps wherein its exterior jurisdictional boundaries (which are same as 1867 Treaty area) are recognized by State and -2. ~ \ . . 4 clearly marked with signpost by Oklahoma Department of Transportation see (Exs-1-2) Tribe continues to exercise governmental jurisdiction and authority over Treaty area according to signed letter from Tribe (Ex-3) pursuant to Article 4 ' Sections 1-2 of Tribes Constitution enacted by Oklahoma Indian Welfare Act of 1936 25 U.S.C. $ 50] et seq. (OJWA)as successfully argued by United States as Amicus for the Tribe in Oklahoma Tax Commission v. Citizen Band Potawatomi Indian Tribe 498 U.S. 505 (1991) wherein US. stated “...these promises