Justices Consider Whether Large Swath of Oklahoma Is Still An Indian Reservation
WASHINGTON – In recent years most arguments before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding political divisions have involved racial and partisan gerrymandering. On Monday, the justices considered a case that asks, at its heart, whether a large swath of eastern Oklahoma remains an American Indian reservation.
In the underlying lawsuit, septuagenarian Jimcy McGirt, who is serving a 500-year prison sentence for molesting a child, claims he was wrongly convicted in state court because it had no authority to try him for a crime committed on reservation land.
“Congress never terminated the Creek reservation and never transferred federal jurisdiction to Oklahoma,” said Ian Gershengorn, who argued the case on McGirt’s behalf before the court.
Gershengorn maintained that as a result, only federal authorities were entitled to prosecute his client.
But Mithun Mansinghani, Oklahoma’s solicitor general, said Gershengorn was mistaken.
“Oklahoma has jurisdiction over the eastern half of the state because it was never reservation land, and it’s certainly not reservation land today,” he said.
This was the court’s second attempt to resolve the status of eastern Oklahoma.
In November 2018, the justices heard arguments in Sharp v. Murphy, which presented the same issue in an appeal from a ruling of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
That case stemmed from the prosecution in state court of Patrick Murphy, a Creek Indian, for murdering another man in rural McIntosh County, in east-central Oklahoma.
After he was sentenced to death, it emerged that the murder had taken place on what had, at least at one time, been Indian land.
Murphy argued that only the federal government could prosecute him and that a federal law barred the imposition of the death penalty because he was an Indian. The 10th Circuit, on which Circuit Court Judge Neil Gorsuch then sat, agreed.
According to the Circuit Court, Congress never clearly eliminated the Creek Nation reservation it created in 1866.
In 2018, Justice Gorsuch had to recuse himself from the case when it made its way to the high court, and the remaining justices deadlocked 4-4.
As they listened to arguments in the McGirt case, a number of the justices expressed concern that ruling for the tribe could have enormous consequences not only for criminal cases, but for everything from business disputes to foster care.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said the issues before the court were complex, and she was worried that hundreds of state convictions, many for heinous crimes, would be undone and could require retrials in federal court.
Mansinghani stoked these concerns further by telling the justices that since McGirt’s appeal, 178 inmates have sought to reopen their cases, calling those “just the initial cracks in the dam.”
He said ruling for McGirt could result in the release of more than 3,000 state prisoners and require federal authorities to prosecute about 8,000 felonies annually that would otherwise have been handled by the state.
But Gorsuch, who could participate in Monday’s case, suggested that assertion was overstated, based on what has occurred since the appeals court ruling in the murder case.
“I would have thought that … we might have seen a tsunami of cases, if there were a real problem here, that we haven’t seen,” the justice said.
Gorsuch, whose vote may turn out to be the decisive one, has taken a broad view of the rights of Native Americans in other cases.
In The News
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court announced on Thursday that it would decide whether Congress may see currently redacted parts of the report prepared by Special Counsel Robert Mueller during his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election. As is their custom, the justices did not... Read More
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court struck down a ban on taxpayer funding for religious schools on Tuesday, saying such institutions can't be prevented from participating in programs that use public funds to support private education. The 5-4 ruling upheld a Montana scholarship program that allows state... Read More
WASHINGTON — A nearly unanimous Supreme Court said Tuesday that the travel website Booking.com can trademark its name, a ruling of high significance to other companies using a generic word followed by ".com." as a name. Lower courts had sided with Booking.com, but the Trump administration... Read More
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed President Donald Trump's ability to fire the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Monday, but left undisturbed the rest of the statute that created the agency in the wake of the 2008 global financial crisis. Writing for the... Read More
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court upheld a provision of federal law Monday that requires foreign affiliates of U.S.-based health organizations to denounce prostitution as a condition of receiving taxpayer money to fight AIDS around the world. Writing for the majority in the 5-3 ruling, Justice Brett... Read More
WASHINGTON - A divided Supreme Court on Monday refused to block the execution of four federal prison inmates -- executions that will mark the first use of the death penalty on the federal level in nearly 20 years. A majority of justices declined to hear an... Read More