Supreme Court Narrows Ruling for Tribes in Oklahoma
Source: New York Times
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Wednesday narrowed the sweep of its landmark 2020 decision declaring that much of eastern Oklahoma falls within Indian reservation lands, allowing state authorities to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians on the reservations. The ruling left in place the basic holding of the 2020 decision, McGirt v. Oklahoma, which said that Native Americans who commit crimes on the reservations, which include much of the city of Tulsa, cannot be prosecuted by state or local law enforcement and must instead face justice in tribal or federal courts.
The vote on Wednesday was 5 to 4, with Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who was not on the court when the McGirt case was decided, casting the decisive vote. The new case concerned Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta, who was convicted of severely neglecting his 5-year-old stepdaughter, a member of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians who has cerebral palsy and is legally blind. In 2015, she was found dehydrated, emaciated and covered in lice and excrement, weighing just 19 pounds. Mr. Castro-Huerta, who is not an Indian, was prosecuted by state authorities, convicted in state court and sentenced to 35 years in prison.
After the McGirt decision, an Oklahoma appeals court vacated his conviction on the ground that the crime had taken place in Indian Country. The appeals court relied on earlier rulings that crimes committed on reservations by or against Indians could not be prosecuted by state authorities. Federal prosecutors then pursued charges against Mr. Castro-Huerta, and he pleaded guilty to child neglect in federal court and entered a plea agreement calling for a seven-year sentence. His sentencing is scheduled for August. Prosecution in a tribal court was not an option in the case, as tribal courts generally lack authority to try non-Indians for crimes against Indians.
In asking the Supreme Court to weigh in on the case, Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta, No. 21-429, John M. O’Connor, Oklahoma’s attorney general, said the justices had “never squarely held that states do not have concurrent authority to prosecute non-Indians for state-law crimes committed against Indians in Indian Country.” Lawyers for Mr. Castro-Huerta responded that the Supreme Court, lower courts and Congress had all said that crimes committed on reservations by or against Indians could not be prosecuted by state authorities.
Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/29/us/supreme-court-ruling-oklahoma-tribes.html
(link to opinion included in the tweet and tweet text)
Link to tweet
@SCOTUSblog
·
Jun 29, 2022
The Supreme Court rules that states CAN prosecute crimes against Native American victims committed on Native American reservations if the defendant is non-Native. The decision limits the scope of the 2020 ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma (which involved a Native American defendant).
SCOTUSblog
@SCOTUSblog
·
Follow
Here's the opinion from Brett Kavanaugh in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta: https://supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-429_8o6a.pdf
. The vote is 5-4. Neil Gorsuch writes a dissent, joined by Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
= new reply since forum marked as read
