High court backs Native American in speeding case

Justices reject appeal from Tulsa, Okla., while legal case continues

The Supreme Court refused to block a lower-court ruling Friday that would revoke the authority of Oklahoma officials to enforce certain laws against Native Americans amid legal confusion over the justices’ 2020 declaration that a large swath of the state remains Indian Country.

Two justices suggested in a statement accompanying the order that the city of Tulsa’s request to halt the lower-court ruling was premature, and that officials could continue enforcing local laws while the litigation continues.

In a major ruling three years ago, the Supreme Court reclassified most of eastern Oklahoma, including Tulsa, as an American Indian reservation. The decision disrupted criminal prosecutions and led to other legal questions about the power to enforce local laws against Native Americans accused of violating those statutes within a municipality’s limits.

The latest case began with Justin Hooper, a member of the Choctaw Nation who lives in Tulsa. He was ticketed for speeding in the summer of 2018 on land within Tulsa’s borders on the Muscogee (Creek) Nation reservation.

Hooper paid the $150 traffic ticket. But after the Supreme Court’s ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma two years later, Hooper went to court and argued the city does not have jurisdiction to prosecute Indians for violations of city law that occur within the reservation boundaries.

Hooper lost the first round in District Court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit reversed that ruling in an initial decision, siding with Hooper and sending the case back to the trial court.

There were no noted dissents from the Supreme Court’s order Friday.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, joined by Samuel A. Alito

Jr., said in an accompanying statement that the 10th Circuit’s decision does not prohibit Tulsa from “continuing to enforce its municipal laws against all persons, including Indians, as the litigation progresses.”

A spokesperson for the city did not immediately return a request for comment.

Tulsa’s lawyers told the justices the 10th Circuit decision “creates a potentially dangerous situation” there and in other similar cities and towns because laws “enacted for the protection of the health and safety of its residents are only enforceable by the City against some citizens but not others.”

Requiring police officers to consider whether a person is Native American during traffic stops or in the course of addressing other minor offenses such as trespassing or shoplifting will “change every single stop and extend all stops measurably because of the additional inquiries an officer will now be required to make.” The questions also apply to city rules related to fire safety and building codes.

Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt, a Republican, also urged the justices to reverse the lower-court ruling.

“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,” he said in a statement.

Lawyers representing several tribes say the city lacks authority over Hooper without clear direction from Congress.

They went on to reject claims that the ruling would lead to widespread disruption, calling such concerns “conjectural, anecdotal and hyperbolic.”

The city, they say, has entered into agreements with Creek and Cherokee nations to refer criminal misdemeanors and felonies for prosecution by the tribes.

“That Tulsa has selectively elected not to adhere to those agreements specifically for traffic offenses renders its claims of irreparable harm hollow and hardly a valid basis for a stay — particularly one that would prolong the City’s illegal exercise of jurisdiction over tribal citizens,” says a brief filed by the Muscogee Nation in support of Hooper.