Posted on 08/03/2023 5:22:52 AM PDT by LouAvul
TULSA, Okla. — The U.S. Supreme Court extended a stay on Hooper v. Tulsa the first stay expired at 5 p.m. Aug. 2. An order by Justice Gorsuch now extends the stay to 5 p.m. on Friday.
2 News previously reported the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling from Tulsa's district court in favor of Hooper in June.
The City of Tulsa appealed the 10th Circuit Courts decision taking the case to the Supreme Court in July. Tulsa Mayor G.T. Bynum previously stated, "Today I have authorized our attorneys to request that the United States Supreme Court hear this case and give all parties clarity so we can move forward. As we have with their other rulings, we will honor whatever the courts decide. But we need to know what federal law allows."
Justin Hooper brought the case up against the City of Tulsa following a traffic ticket he received from Tulsa Police on Muscogee (Creek) Nation land.
After the initial ruling in Tulsa's district court, Hooper appealed the decision citing 2020's Supreme Court's McGirt v. Oklahoma opinion. The ruling says that Oklahoma's non-Tribal law enforcement has no jurisdiction to prosecute Tribal members who committed a crimes on Tribal land.
According to City of Tulsa officials said this case influences the amount of jurisdiction law enforcement has, as parts of Tulsa city limits fall within the boundaries of the Muscogee Creek Nation reservation. Tribal leaders have applauded to the 10th District Court of Appeals decision and hope the Supreme Court follows suit ruling in favor of Tribal members.
Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt is encouraged by the Supreme Court's decision to stay the proceedings: I am encouraged that the United States Supreme Court delayed the implementation of the 10th Circuit’s devastating decision in Hooper v. City of Tulsa. If the Hooper decision stands, the City of Tulsa, using their own words to the Supreme Court, '...will no longer be able to enforce violations of municipal ordinances against Indian inhabitants.' We must operate under one set of rules, regardless of race, heritage or background, and cannot allow Tulsa and much of the rest of eastern Oklahoma to be turned into a reservation.
The pimps in DC are chuckling under that one.
“’...will no longer be able to enforce violations of municipal ordinances against Indian inhabitants.’”
No, Tulsa will not be able to enforce violations of municipal ordinances WITHOUT THE CONSENT of the tribal authorities.
Exactly!
Why did the City of Tulsa believe they had the right to annex tribal land?
Was it an attempt to gain tax revenue?
Tulsa is in what was the old Creek Nation.
The Tribe believes that the Tulsa Police Dept, nor the Tulsa Co. Sheriff has jurisdiction over anyTribal member in Tulsa Co. or the City of Tulsa.
Only the Tribal Police can arrest a Tribal member.
Three quarters of Oklahoma is tribal land.
This case was not about some city ordinance. It was a speeding violation. In theory, n
Native Americans can drive recklessly at warp 5 and not receive a ticket.
Attached at the hip of this case is also McGirt vs Oklahoma. It was the rape of a 4 year old girl. The state violation was overturned and McGirt was tried on federal charges.
Try to think of a crime that is only a state law and does not have a corresonding federal law. I’m sure there are many. Election laws come to mind.
EC
This isn’t just “opening up a can of worms”, but “opening up a 55 gallon drum of worms.”
The overlap of Indian, State, and Federal law is a mess. For over a hundred years now, the feds in particular have “kicked the can down the road” by refusing to act.
It starts with the fact that most Indian treaties are unenforceable gobbledygook, sometimes containing random cut-and-paste text from unrelated documents as “filler”. Also using transient boundaries, like “the second big tree on the west side of the hill, by that beaver over there.”
And the garbage sauce on top of it all is the BIA, which holds records for being the most inept, corrupt, ineffectual government agency ever.
If we believe Congress and the Supreme Court are bound to the Constitution as written that includes Native American self-governance.
For people in Oklahoma and elsewhere that moved to tribal land that complicates their lives, but these decisions are correct.
Next thing will be white people in Oklahoma that own land , do not really own it if not a tribal member.
Didn’t know that. Thanks for the background!
Did the Constitution give them permission to buy that land?
I am sorry. I don’t understand. Are you saying that a tribal member does not have the right to sell their property to anyone. That they can only sell to another tribal member.
Not sure, that depends on what the treaty we signed with that tribe states.
If the United States signed a treaty saying that land would always be tribal owned, and that law was never repealed, then those sales would be null and void.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.