The goal of this paper is to show how the rule in Plume v. Seward and the actual practice of the Board of Land Commissioners in California at the time are not in synch. In Section II, I provide the historical background to the United States imperialist goal of Manifest Destiny. This section also gives a factual introduction to Plume and the procedure of the Board of Land Commissioners. Section III contrasts the result in Plume with the outcomes in the Board's decisions in factually similar land claims. Section IV analyzes the Guadalupe-Hidalgo Treaty Land Claims Act proposed to Congress in 2001 and asks whether its proposals provide a just form of repair for those adversely affected by post-Treaty claims adjudication. I also argue in this section that the racially-biased handling of Mexican land claims after the Treaty has far-reaching effects, implicating many issues facing Mexican Americans today.


Symposium: Eighth Annual LatCrit Conference City & The Citizen: Operations of Power, Strategies of Resistance: Section IV: Migration, Land and Labor: Outlooks on Latina/o Reparations