Supreme Court Holds Large Piece of Oklahoma Belongs to Native American Tribe

July 9, 2020 by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that a large part of eastern Oklahoma belongs to Native American tribes – a significant victory for a reservation that challenged the state’s authority to prosecute crimes on its land.

Writing for the majority, in the 5-4 decision, Justice Neil Gorsuch said the disputed area, which covers about half of the state, belongs to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

“Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for purposes of federal criminal law,” Gorsuch wrote. “Because Congress has not said otherwise, we hold the government to its word.”

For purposes of the Major Crimes Act, land reserved for the Creek Nation since the 19th century remains “Indian country,” Gorsuch said.

He was joined in the majority by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan.

The underlying lawsuit was filed by Jimcy McGirt, a member of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, who was convicted of sex crimes against a child by the state of Oklahoma within the historical Creek Nation boundaries.

He argued that Oklahoma could not exercise jurisdiction over him because under the Indian Major Crimes Act, any crime involving a Native American victim or perpetrator, or occurring within recognized reservation boundaries, is subject to federal jurisdiction, not state jurisdiction.

Thursday’s ruling could upend the state’s authority over much of the land and restrict it from prosecuting tribal members who commit crimes on the reservation.

The ruling is an indication of how Gorsuch’s presence has already transformed the court in a significant way. Based on a long history of cases, many had cynically come to see the Supreme Court as the venue in which Native American tribes consistently lost.

But throughout his career, Gorsuch has distinguished himself by enforcing the clear language of contracts and treaties the federal government has executed with tribes.

Chief Justice John Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices Samuel Alito, Jr. and Brett Kavanaugh in full, and by Justice Clarence Thomas, except for a footnote.

Thomas also filed his own dissenting opinion.

The court also released a brief unsigned decision in Sharp v. Murphy, which had been held over since last term, affirming the 10th Circuit’s ruling in light of Thursday’s decision.

In the underlying case, Patrick Dwayne Murphy, a member of the Creek Nation, was convicted in Oklahoma state court and sentenced to death for the 1999 murder of George Jacobs, who was a member of the same nation.

Murphy’s conviction and death sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. Murphy then sought post-conviction relief on jurisdictional grounds, arguing that the Major Crimes Act gave the federal government exclusive jurisdiction to prosecute murders committed by Indians in Indian Country, a term defined under federal law to include reservations, allotments, and dependent Indian communities.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals ultimately rejected Murphy’s jurisdictional argument, sending the case to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal.

In August 2017, the 10th Circuit overturned Murphy’s murder conviction and death sentence, determining he was unfairly tried in state court for a crime that occurred on tribal land.

The 10th Circuit’s determination that the Creek reservation was never disbanded has threatened to throw into question not only Murphy’s conviction but others that occurred in east-central Oklahoma. 

It was for that reason that Solicitor General Francisco and Oklahoma Attorney General Mike Hunter asked the Supreme Court to intervene in the case.

In essence, Murphy’s case raised the same underlying question as McGirt did: Whether the 1866 territorial boundaries of the Creek Nation within the former Indian Territory of eastern Oklahoma constitute an “Indian reservation” under the relevant federal regulations today.

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Won't Halt Challenged Border Wall Projects
Supreme Court
Supreme Court Won't Halt Challenged Border Wall Projects

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court declined by a 5-4 vote Friday to halt the Trump administration's construction of portions of the border wall with Mexico following a recent lower court ruling that the administration improperly diverted money to the project. The court's four liberal justices dissented, saying... Read More

With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?
Immigration
With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?

President Donald Trump came into office vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare. While he successfully neutralized the health care law’s requirement that everyone carry insurance, the law remains in effect. When Fox News host Chris Wallace noted that Trump has yet to put forward a replacement... Read More

John Roberts’ Latest Deciding Vote Spurs Wrath of Conservatives
Supreme Court
John Roberts’ Latest Deciding Vote Spurs Wrath of Conservatives

The latest Supreme Court vote cast by Chief Justice John Roberts, rejecting an effort by a Nevada church to ease limits on attendance at its services during the coronavirus pandemic, was condemned by conservative lawmakers. Roberts was the decider late Friday, joining the court’s liberals in... Read More

With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?
Political News
With DACA Ruling, Did Supreme Court Grant Trump New Powers to Reshape Health Care?

President Donald Trump came into office vowing to repeal and replace Obamacare. While he successfully neutralized the health care law’s requirement that everyone carry insurance, the law remains in effect. When Fox News host Chris Wallace noted that Trump has yet to put forward a replacement... Read More

Justice Ginsburg Says Cancer Has Returned, But She Won't Retire
Supreme Court
Justice Ginsburg Says Cancer Has Returned, But She Won't Retire
July 17, 2020
by Dan McCue

WASHINGTON - Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Friday she is receiving chemotherapy for a recurrence of cancer, but has no plans to retire from the Supreme Court. The 87-year-old Ginsburg, who spent time in the hospital this week for a possible infection, said she began chemotherapy... Read More

Despite Supreme Court Ruling, Administration Rejects New DACA Applications
Immigration
Despite Supreme Court Ruling, Administration Rejects New DACA Applications

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump is venturing onto increasingly shaky legal ground as officials reject new applications for the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, sidestepping a Supreme Court ruling reinstating DACA, legal experts and lawmakers say. The court ruled last month that the Trump administration... Read More

News From The Well
scroll top