3874
Comments (416)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
4
TuckerCarlsonsTie 4 points ago +5 / -1

I’d argue I’m not reading jurisdiction broadly at all. Gorsuch took any legal standing for crimes committed in lands covered with the Treaty with the Creeks-1866 away from Oklahoma, even if they are Creek Indians. The AG of Oklahoma does not have legal standing to prosecute crimes on “tribal lands”, well Tulsa, Oklahoma ain’t exactly “tribal land” anymore and that’s where the crime took place. I’d say Gorsuch’s broad definition of treaty law pretty well effectively takes away half of Oklahoma from Oklahoma’s sovereign rule as an independent state and their ability to carry out justice as it stands for the people of Oklahoma. Samuel Alito said himself that Oklahomans are going to wake up and find out they are now under tribal and federal law instead of state law. That’s a pretty big ratcheting of authority away from the State of Oklahoma.

3
PeaceThroughStrength 3 points ago +3 / -0

Not exactly, the OK AG can still bring claims against solely non-US citizens, but Gorsuch essentially gave a close reading of the Indian treaties which are still in effect, and found that the temporal area they encompassed included half of Oklahoma.

That half of Oklahoma now has to apply a bit more federal common law and probably the court of first review would be federal District Court but that's already currently in place anyway under the general application of federal subject matter jurisdiction.

Thus the operative question would be whether a federal subject matter jurisdiction applies here, and in this case it could arise on questions of whether the defendant is covered under the Indian treaties and whether the underlying case arose on land covered by the Indian treaties.

I hate it, but Gorsuch is right.

If we want to pull land away from the Indians, we need do it openly and clearly otherwise we leave legal timebombs like this which now leaves the entire state of Oklahoma needs to ask whether federalism still exists there.