Good cause imho opinion

[LOW1]

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=4][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=4][LEFT]Jet Man and all others, I am glad that we can have a civil discussion about this. The following is the conclusion of the Eighth Circuit's decision (later upheld by the Supreme Court) which I thought eloquently describes the situation, accurately predicts future disagreements, and which also expresses conidence in finding mutually acceptable solutions:

"Despite the 160 years that have passed since the signing of the Treaty, it remains
good law. One of the hallmarks of our constitutional system is respect for the law,
regardless of changing circumstances or the inevitable passage of time. This court is
fully cognizant of the significant rights and interests maintained by all of the parties in
this litigation. The parties have attempted in good faith by negotiation to resolve their
differences. Failing to do so, the courts have the responsibility to decide the issues
under prevailing rules of law. We are aware of the professed hardships and
compromises all litigants on both sides of this litigation must endure. Yet we are
confident that all parties recognize that we are a court of limited jurisdiction, and do not
possess the power to rewrite the treaties or interpret them contrary to principles of
settled law to accommodate one group over the other.[/LEFT]
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman][LEFT] [/LEFT]
[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=4][FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=4][LEFT]We commend particularly the State of Minnesota and the various Bands for their
willingness to reach agreement regarding the valuable resources in the Conservation
Code and Management Plan. We can only express hope that such spirit of cooperation
will continue to prevail and that all parties will recognize the mutual rights of one
another as now declared in this opinion."[/LEFT]
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]