Oklahoma cases front and center for Supreme Court

Listen to this article

The U.S. Supreme Court’s schedule for its first day of work in the new year was dominated by the name of one state: Oklahoma. The state’s plan to resolve the uncertainties created by the McGirt decision involves much discussion before the court – but little discussion with tribal leaders.

The Supreme Court’s conference schedule for Jan. 7, 2022 included more than 30 cases Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor’s office has requested the court consider this session. Of the long list of cases with names that start with “Oklahoma v.,” many had been dismissed from the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals over the last year for lack of jurisdiction in light of the McGirt ruling.

The Supreme Court ruled in 2020 in McGirt v. Oklahoma that the Muscogee (Creek) Nation’s reservation was never properly dissolved, making much of eastern Oklahoma Native land under jurisdiction of tribal governments. Though the ruling specifically addressed jurisdiction for criminal offenses involving tribal citizens, the ruling has created uncertainty regarding jurisdiction over taxation and regulation as well.

Congress responded to the state’s request for relief with legislation encouraging the state to work with tribal leaders on agreements to clear up the uncertainties. But thus far, Gov. Kevin Stitt and tribal leaders have not done much talking with each other.

On Thursday afternoon, the chief of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation issued an open letter encouraging Stitt to abandon his efforts to have the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma overturned. In his letter, Principal Chief David Hill encouraged Stitt to instead work with the tribes to craft collaborative agreements concerning shared economic and judicial interests.

“In the year and a half since the Court’s ruling in McGirt, Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt has not held a single meaningful discussion with tribes to discuss ways we can work together to implement it,” Hill wrote. “Instead, he and his allies have used inflammatory rhetoric, misdirection and overt obstruction tactics to convince the public that McGirt has caused “chaos.”

On Thursday afternoon, Stitt posted a video news clip to the governor’s official Twitter account.

“Sad story out of Broken Arrow,” the post reads. “A family’s two dogs were killed by someone else’s dogs, but the McGirt ruling prevents police from doing anything since the other owner is native.”

Case after case before the Supreme Court includes briefs issued by the state attorney general and by counsel for tribal leaders.

Hill’s message also encourages the high court to reject the state’s requests and encourage state leaders to work with the tribes.

“Should the Supreme Court ignore precedent and overturn or modify this decision, all this progress will be lost at the expense of public safety in Oklahoma and the Court’s integrity,” Hill wrote. “The Supreme Court reversing or modifying its decision now would also reward extremely bad faith behavior by Oklahoma…

“The citizens of Oklahoma aren’t buying the State’s contrived doomsday scenarios, and neither should the Supreme Court,” Hill wrote. “The time is long past due for Gov. Stitt to shut down his political campaign of obstruction and work with us to embrace a better future. This January, I hope the Supreme Court will take the opportunity to tell him so.”

The court will issue a decision in its own time as to whether or not to take up the cases. Friday’s discussion was dominated by cases several states – including Oklahoma – has brought to the court challenging federal vaccination mandates.