National labor relations act set up a process called in which a neutral party could listen to opposing

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.  

the caste system in india is the paradigmatic ethnographic example of caste. it has origins in ancient india, and was transformed by various ruling elites in medieval, early-modern, and modern india, especially the mughal empire and the british raj.it is today the basis of educational and job reservations in india.it consists of two different concepts, varna and jati, which may be regarded as different levels of analysis of this system.

the caste system as it exists today is thought to be the result of developments during the collapse of the mughal era and the british colonial regime in india. the collapse of the mughal era saw the rise of powerful men who associated themselves with kings, priests and ascetics, affirming the regal and martial form of the caste ideal, and it also reshaped many apparently casteless social groups into differentiated caste communities.the british raj furthered this development, making rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration

i didn’t fully understand your question but i hope this you !