geographical limitation what amounted to a racial classification instead of corollary to that is that when the department of interior uses the definition of the indigenous groups with the geographical limitations it is the department of interior that is now engaged in the unconstitutional impermissible criteria their power is not absolute and injuries authority is derivative of congress so if congress cannot rely on constitutionally impermissible grace period either going to department all we are asking is that the indigenous native hawaiian groups be afforded the same opportunity to apply for knowledge as all the other indigenous people in the other forty nine states where th you're going to get up here and they're going to try to steer this court's attention to the direction of the political question dr that's not why we're here we are here we invoke the jurisdiction of this sport to take a look at the twenty five  eighty three regulations which appear to be neutral but the geographical limitation we may think amounts to unconstitutional racial discrimination against the indigenous native white twenty five see that we do meet the criteria that we do meet substantially the criteria for for federal acknowledgment they don't mention that in their brief they completely did not tell the court below about about that report we had to bring to the i would see that the political document that good morning your honor my name is helen durkee i represent the department of the interior i am indeed going to waste his parts time i talking about the political question doctor of the plaintiff's amended complaint this he's challenged on equal protection ground relationship and it strives power comes from congress yes congress in your montana example passed a statute that made it quite clear that congress intended to have a government to government relationship with montana tri regulation would fall by the wayside so i do think court has decided that is what the district court decided by the way what the political question is if you reach the conclusion that congress has failed to make this recognition fail to choose for the united states to begin a government to government relations with native hawaiians the place will question dr prevents the court from going the extra step not saying well congress hasn't acted but we're going to decide whether we think that would be a good regulation is valid it leaves you with recognizing that it's going to be congress that is going to have to take the steps recognize as entering into a government your relationship  is and i i would feel better if i could have you know i would feel better for the supplemental brief that because that's not an area i'm an expert in but the what that data set aside certainly lance but if the but in the admissions that defined by their ancestry that congress is terminated them on based on race class but i mean that's essential if they're saying here is a reason though that there are differences in the way different tribes are treated why some have the government relationships and some don't have any kind of in anybody's conception of what an indian and that then that is the extent to which it's meant for is recognised constitutional authority to question trucks like to touch briefly on the statue of limitations i think this is another jurisdictional barrier to their claim here and they have never answered that decisions it would be too late salinger and that's the way it would be order to determine whether you should be able to apply those you have to be able to determine whether they can maintain their basic position that's not are these are cases