And? I’ve never seen anyone anywhere argue otherwise. Even the original CBC article pointed that out pretty clearly.

(Although I’ll point out the Piapot First Nation has recently come out to say her name isn’t on their membership role, so apparently the claims there are highly tenuous).

The problem isn’t that Ms. St.-Marie claims to be native because she was adopted as an adult not a native community — it’s that she has claimed for decades that she was a 60s scoop survivor, born on a Canadian reservation and adopted by white parents — none of which is true. She’s changed her story about her heritage multiple times, at times claiming she knew and visited her indigenous birth mother regularly, and other ties (like now) claiming she doesn’t know who her indigenous birth mother is. She’s claimed to have been from multiple tribes — all before being adopted as an adult into the Piapot First Nation family.

If I had been adopted as an adult by a black family, that wouldn’t give me the right to go around claiming I was a runaway slave from the pre-Civil War southern US, who came to Canada via the Underground Railroad. Ms. St.-Marie doesn’t (and shouldn’t) get a pass for her lies.

She isn’t native by heritage — and that is what she’s been lying about for decades, and that is what people have a problem with. If she “feels” native by adult adoption she just had to say so, and not lie about her actual heritage for the last 50+ years.

She didn't say she had been adopted by them, she said she was born from first Nation parents and adopted into a white family!

One doesn't exclude the other.