Jeong Park
@jeongpark.bsky.social
7.8K followers 780 following 340 posts
Assistant Metro Editor at The Seattle Times
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
Reposted by Jeong Park
circlingseasports.bsky.social
Oh my god… Humpy just earned a win in the Mariners Salmon Run.

#TridentsUp #SeizeTheMoment #Postseason
Reposted by Jeong Park
mjsdc.bsky.social
Washington Supreme Court Justice Mungia has an extraordinary opinion condemning "the underlying racism and prejudices that are woven into the very fabric" of SCOTUS opinions about Native people.

"We must clearly, loudly, and unequivocally state that was wrong.”
www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf...
MUNGIA, J. (concurring)—I concur with the majority’s opinion.1
 And yet I
dissent. Not from the majority’s opinion, but I dissent from the racism embedded in the
federal case law that applies to this dispute.
FEDERAL INDIAN LAW IS A PRODUCT OF THE RACIST BELIEFS ENDEMIC IN OUR SOCIETY
AND OUR LEGAL SYSTEM
While it is certainly necessary to follow federal case law on issues involving
Native American tribes and their members, at the same time it is important to call out that
the very foundations of those opinions were based on racism and white supremacy. By
doing this, readers of our opinions will have no doubt that the current court disavows, and
condemns, those racist sentiments, beliefs, and statements. Since the founding of our country, the federal government has characterized
Native Americans as “savages”: They were “uncivilized.” They had little claim to the
land upon which they lived. At times, the federal government attempted to eradicate
Native Americans through genocidal policies. At other times, the federal government
employed ethnic cleansing by forcibly removing children from their parents’ homes to
strip them from their culture, their language, and their beings.2
Federal Indian case law arises from those racist underpinnings.
The majority correctly cites to Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 Pet.) 1, 8
L. Ed. 25 (1831), which is one of the foundational cases involving tribal sovereignty.
That opinion is rife with racist attitudes toward Native Americans. Chief Justice John
Marshall, writing for the majority, describes a tribe’s relationship to the federal
government as one of “ward to his guardian.” Id. at 17. In effect, the opinion presents
tribal members as children, and the federal government as the adult. That theme would
follow in later opinions by the United States Supreme Court—as would the theme of
white supremacy.
Cherokee Nation began with the premise that Native American tribes, once strong
and powerful, were no match for the white race and so found themselves “gradually
sinking beneath our superior policy, our arts and our arms.” Id. at 15. The white man
was considered the teacher, the Native Americans the pupils: Meanwhile they are in a state of pupilage. Their relation to the United
States resembles that of a ward to his guardian.
Id. at 17.
This characterization of superior to inferior, teacher to student, guardian to ward,
was repeated in later United States Supreme Court opinions.
In Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553, 23 S. Ct. 216, 47 L. Ed. 299 (1903),
often characterized as the “American Indian Dred Scott,”
3
the Court used that rationale to
justify ruling that the United States could break its treaties with Native American tribes.
These Indian tribes are the wards of the nation. They are communities
dependent on the United States. Dependent largely for their daily food.
Dependent for their political rights. . . . From their very weakness and
helplessness . . . there arises the duty of protection, and with it the power.
Id. at 567 (quoting United States v. Kagama, 118 U.S. 375, 383-84, 6 S. Ct. 1109, 30 L.
Ed. 228 (1886)).
Our court also carries the shame of denigrating Native Americans by using that
same characterization: “The Indian was a child, and a dangerous child, of nature, to be
both protected and restrained.” State v. Towessnute, 89 Wash. 478, 482, 154 P. 805
(1916), judgment vacated and opinion repudiated by 197 Wn.2d 574, 486 P.3d 111
(2020).
3 See A Returning to Cherokee Nation, Justice William Johnson’s separate opinion was
less tempered in how he considered the various Native American tribes:
I cannot but think that there are strong reasons for doubting the
applicability of the epithet state, to a people so low in the grade of
organized society as our Indian tribes most generally are.
Cherokee Nation, 30 U.S. at 21. Native Americans were not to be treated as “equals to
equals” but, instead, the United States was the conqueror and Native Americans the
conquered. Id. at 23.
In discussing Native Americans, Justice Johnson employed another racist trope
used by judges both before and after him: Native Americans were uncivilized savages.
[W]e have extended to them the means and inducement to become
agricultural and civilized. . . . Independently of the general influence of
humanity, these people were restless, warlike, and signally cruel.
. . . .
But I think it very clear that the constitution neither speaks of them as states
or foreign states, but as just what they were, Indian tribes . . . which the law
of nations would regard as nothing more than wandering hordes, held
together only by ties of blood and habit, and having neither laws or
government, beyond what is required in a savage state.
Id. at 23, 27-28.
This same characterization was used by Justice Stanley Matthews in Ex parte KanGi-Shun-Ca (otherwise known as Crow Dog), 109 U.S. 556, 3 S. Ct. 396, 27 L. Ed. 1030
(1883). Justice Matthews described Native Americans as leading a savage life.
Reposted by Jeong Park
oregonian.com
Things are happening at Portland's ICE facility tonight.

Read more of our protest coverage here: www.oregonlive.com/crime/2025/1...
jeongpark.bsky.social
What the hell was that?
jeongpark.bsky.social
Man, props to all the work. Y'all been doing some amazing work
jeongpark.bsky.social
Worth noting for WA, BTW:

"House Bill 1321, sponsored by Rep. Sharlett Mena (D-Tacoma), requires the Governor’s permission for National Guard troops from other states, territories or districts to enter Washington, unless they are mobilized by the president."

governor.wa.gov/news/2025/go...
Governor Bob Ferguson signs bill restricting armed forces from entering Washington | Governor Bob Ferguson
governor.wa.gov
jeongpark.bsky.social
Notable -> "And Portland is not the same city it was five years ago, according to officials’ open letter last week. Tourism there is at a post-pandemic high, and gun violence and homicides have plummeted in recent years."
Reposted by Jeong Park
brianmfloyd.bsky.social
they’re forming a bike buttallion
jeffvandermeer.bsky.social
Portland enacts emergency powers of nudity to check federal overreach.
Emergency World Naked Bike Ride planned in Portland, with blurred photi of naked bicyclists.
jeongpark.bsky.social
Just realizing we weren't too far off from Oregon Governor Nick Kristof facing off against President Trump
Reposted by Jeong Park
jeongpark.bsky.social
This city is something special, man
Reposted by Jeong Park
brianmfloyd.bsky.social
the seattle mariners baseball team (playoff edition)
jeongpark.bsky.social
Yes, Cascade PBS is our (Seattle Times's) "competitor," so to speak, but also its journalists and their work has pushed us to do better ourselves -- When a region loses a journalist, its impact goes far beyond just a single job.
jeongpark.bsky.social
I also remain very puzzled as to how Cascade PBS will expand its news show from one to five days a week while laying off journalists.
jeongpark.bsky.social
Today was a sad day in Seattle journalism. As someone who read and followed Cascade PBS's work every day (for my job), they produced unique and compelling work week in and week out. This will be a big loss...
meganburbank.bsky.social
Today, I was laid off from Cascade PBS along with my entire team and most of the newsroom. I'll have more to say, but I have loved my time as news editor alongside some of the best journalists I have ever worked with. Every time a newsroom closes, stories go with it. The silence that follows is loud
kuow.org
The move, attributed to the loss of federal funding for public media, marks the layoffs of 17 staffers and the creation of three new positions.
jeongpark.bsky.social
You don't have to live every moment of your life trying to engage in The Discourse or whatever!
jeongpark.bsky.social
To be honest, this isn't even about how much I like BlueSky. It's much more of "my life and mental health has improved since I started to log off, go out more, work out, touch grass and get into a relationship" kind of a thing
jeongpark.bsky.social
I arguably jumpstarted my career because of Twitter but deleted my account a few months ago (I do have a burner account to monitor but never tweet).

I have not regretted deleting my Twitter for a second
shadihamid.bsky.social
One of the biggest mistakes left-of-center pundits and influencers made was decamping to Bluesky. They made themselves irrelevant, shrunk their audiences, and dramatically lessened the positive impact they could have on our public debate at the precise time we needed it most.
jeongpark.bsky.social
Boo Alaska forever for getting rid of TVs on planes
minakimes.bsky.social
One of my boomer opinions is I miss TVs on airplanes. I don’t want to watch movies and tv on my own device! Don’t make me!