╌>

Supreme Court rules swath of Oklahoma remains tribal reservation

  

Category:  News & Politics

Via:  1stwarrior  •  4 years ago  •  6 comments

Supreme Court rules swath of Oklahoma remains tribal reservation
The court's decision means that Oklahoma prosecutors lack the authority to pursue criminal cases against American Indian defendants in parts of the state.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The Supreme Court   ruled Thursday   that a large chunk of eastern Oklahoma remains an American Indian reservation, a decision that state and federal officials have warned could throw Oklahoma into chaos.

The court's 5-4 decision, written by Justice Neil Gorsuch, means that Oklahoma prosecutors lack the authority to pursue criminal cases against American Indian defendants in parts of Oklahoma that include most of Tulsa, the second-largest city.


The court's ruling casts doubt on hundreds of convictions won by local prosecutors. The case, argued by telephone in May because of the coronavirus pandemic, revolved around an appeal by an American Indian who claimed state courts had no authority to try him for a crime committed on reservation land that belongs to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

The reservation once encompassed 3 million acres (12,100 square kilometers), including most of Tulsa.

The Supreme Court, with eight justices taking part, failed to reach a decision last term when it reviewed a federal appeals court ruling in a separate case that threw out a state murder conviction and death sentence. In that case, the appeals court said the crime occurred on land assigned to the tribe before Oklahoma became a state and Congress never clearly eliminated the Creek Nation reservation it created in 1866.

The case the justices decided Thursday involved 71-year-old Jimcy McGirt, who is serving a 500-year prison sentence for molesting a child. Oklahoma state courts rejected his argument that his case does not belong in Oklahoma courts and that federal prosecutors should instead handle his case.

McGirt could potentially be retried in federal court, as could Patrick Murphy, who was convicted of killing a fellow tribe member in 1999 and sentenced to death. But Murphy would not face the death penalty in federal court for a crime in which prosecutors said he mutilated the victim and left him to bleed to death on the side of a country road about 80 miles southeast of Tulsa.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
[]
 
1stwarrior
Professor Participates
1  seeder  1stwarrior    4 years ago

McGirt could potentially be retried in federal court, as could Patrick Murphy, who was convicted of killing a fellow tribe member in 1999 and sentenced to death. 

McGirt and Murphy will not be released from prison - that's a good thing.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
Professor Principal
1.1  Sean Treacy  replied to  1stwarrior @1    4 years ago

Hard to retry cases from decades ago and win convictions. 
Lots of criminals won the lottery today.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
1.2  Kavika   replied to  1stwarrior @1    4 years ago

Actually following the law of the US Government and treaties, the highest law in the land. Amazing isn't it after decades of getting pissed on.

Let the whining begin. 

 
 
 
Account Deleted
Freshman Silent
2  Account Deleted    4 years ago

Read as much of the ruling as you can. I got tired after 18 pages. I'll read some more tomorrow. This is a damn fine history lesson of the Creek Nation and  its relationship to the Federal Government. Note the attempt at breaking up the reservation:

Page 11

Oklahoma reminds us that allotment was often the first step in a plan ultimately aimed at disestablishment. As this Court explained in Mattz, Congress’s expressed policy at the time “was to continue the reservation system and the trust status of Indian lands, but to allot tracts to individual Indians for agriculture and grazing.” 412 U. S., at 496. Then, “[w]hen all the lands had been allotted and the trust expired, the reservation could be abolished.”
 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1  Kavika   replied to  Account Deleted @2    4 years ago

It's not just the Creek nation, most tribes suffered from  Dawes Severalty Act of 1887 or the General Allotment Act, was signed into law on January 8, 1887, by US President Grover Cleveland. As a result of this act Native people/tribes lost 90 million acres to white settlers. 

Most are not aware that whites own more land on many Indian reservations than the actual tribe.

Example of another con. The tribe was 1,000 members and the reservations is 75,000 acres. Each tribal member got his 40 acres which result in a total of 40,000 acres. What happens to the remaining 35,000 acres? Yup, it became government land that was sold or given to whites. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
Professor Guide
3  Split Personality    4 years ago
Maybe the first thing certain tribes should do, would be to lose the ethnocentric term "civilized" as it was implied by the colonists as some Indians were civilized, other were not and none were equal to white Europeans.  A backhanded "compliment" if ever there was one.

Gorsuch continues to be a surprise, making the hard decisions in spite of the inconveniences off releasing a slew of prisoners.

244 years of the US breaking treaties and looking the other way because it was inconvenient, may be coming to an end.

 
 
 
 

Who is online




582 visitors