I am not an expert in Native American history but the Creek Nation are almost certainly not the originally inhabitants.

This is one of my biggest issues with stuff like this. Why should the Creek Nation get this land and not the tribe that lived there previously? Why not the tribe before that tribe?

Americans often did not treat the natives well but this is an issue with all countries. It was quite common for Natives to kill other tribes and take over that area. It sucks but that is how a country is formed.

>Why should the Creek Nation get this land and not the tribe that lived there previously? Why not the tribe before that tribe?

Because the US government entered into a treaty with the Creek Nation, who were the inhabitants of that land at that time.

I get the US made an agreement. I was talking more of a general principle than this specific case.

I have seen several comments here saying the US was wrong to take land through violent means and as such the US should return the land.

When the natives did the same thing to other natives nobody seems to think they should return it to the people they took it from.

There is a double standard and I don't like it. If we are going to return the land we should return it to the original inhabitants. Of course there isn't actually a way to figure out who occupied the land thousands of years ago.