Stateside Podcast: How a U.S. Supreme Court case out of Oklahoma could impact Michigan’s tribal communities
The recent stretch of U.S. Supreme Court decisions is making big headlines. There was the decision that returned the question of abortion rights to the states, another one that limited the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulatory power, and then there’s Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta. In this case, the majority ruled 5-4 that states do share jurisdictional authority with federal and tribal entities in the prosecution of crimes within Indian Country, when those crimes a non-Native American defendant and a Native American victim. In the 2020 Supreme Court decision from McGirt v. Oklahoma, the court held that the Creek Nation’s reservation in eastern Oklahoma had never been disestablished, meaning that the tribal and federal government had the jurisdiction to prosecute crimes by Indians on those lands. As a result, jurisdiction in these areas was shared by tribal and federal prosecutors. Kirsten Matoy Carlson, a professor of law at Wayne State University, explained that the state of Oklahoma was dissatisfied with this decision. “Post-McGirt, the state has been really hostile toward the tribes in Oklahoma,” Matoy Carlson said. “It has sought to overturn the decision in McGirt 40 times, which is unheard of.” Two years later, the Castro-Huerta decision gave the state a win. Looking forward, Carlson said a lot is unclear, from the practical questions of authority, to how long the Castro-Huerta decision will stand. “The case is unique because it has an extremely powerful descent by Justice Gorsuch,” Matoy Carlson said. “It is very clear to me that when Gorsuch wrote the dissent, he was giving arguments to people so they could make this opinion less important in the future. But it’s really hard to know whether that’s going to happen or not.”