The ruling limits a major tribal ruling issued by the Supreme Court in 2020 and cuts tribal sovereignty.
Oklahoma Republican Gov. Kevin Stitt praised the court’s opinion, calling it a “key moment” in a statement.
Stitt has been fighting for state sovereignty over the issue and had expressed fears that if his side loses, it could pave the way for people to have access to abortion on tribal lands, as a way to evade strict state abortion rules.
“We think there is a possibility that some tribes will try to establish abortion on demand,” he said in an interview with KTUL before the opinion came out. “They think you could be 1/1000 members of the tribe and not have to follow state law. And that’s something we’re looking at.”
Judge Brett Kavanaugh wrote the majority opinion on the case on Wednesday, along with Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito and Amy Coney Barrett. He said the Constitution “allows a state to exercise jurisdiction over the Indian country.”
“The Indian country is part of the state, not separate from the state,” Kavanaugh wrote.
Kavanaugh nodded to a controversial 2020 decision called McGirt v. Oklahoma, where the court held that Congress had never formally destabilized the Creek Reserve, and therefore much of eastern Oklahoma should be considered Indian territory.
That opinion was drafted by Judge Neil Gorsuch and was joined by court liberals, who disagreed with Wednesday’s decision.
McGirt had generated chaos and uncertainty in Oklahoma and raised urgent questions about the scope of a state’s jurisdiction on Indian soil. State courts began reversing numerous convictions that held Oklahoma had no jurisdiction.
The state returned to the high court asking him to overturn McGirt. State attorneys hoped that Barrett, who has taken the seat of the late Liberal Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, would change the majority of the court in his favor. The judges agreed to take on the dispute, but only looked at McGirt’s scope instead of considering whether to dismiss it directly.
All parties acknowledged that the federal government had jurisdiction to prosecute non-Native Americans for crimes on tribal lands, but the new case raised questions about whether the state also had jurisdiction.
On Wednesday the court said yes.
Gorsuch, now at odds with Barrett alongside the Conservatives, criticized the majority’s decision. In a dissent full of references to Native American history, Gorsuch accused the majority of allowing “Oklahoma to be introduced into a feature of tribal sovereignty recognized since its founding.”
“Political branches and future courts can only be expected to do their duty of honor to the promises of this nation even though today we have not made ours,” he said.
The head of the Cherokee nation, Chuck Hoskin Jr., issued a statement criticizing the court’s action, arguing that the high court had “failed against the legal precedent and the basic principles of congressional authority under Indian law.” “. Hoskin said that while they were disappointed with the ruling, “it does not diminish our commitment to fulfilling our public safety responsibilities and protecting the people of Oklahoma on our reservation and across the state.”
The dispute was initially filed by the lawyers of Victor Manuel Castro-Huerta, who is not a member of the tribe, and was convicted of child negligence in a case involving his stepdaughter, who is a member of the East Cherokee Indian Band. The stepdaughter has cerebral palsy and is legally blind. In 2015, Castro-Huerta’s sister-in-law was in the house and noted that her stepdaughter was dehydrated, emaciated and covered in lice and excrement. When questioned, Castro-Huerta admitted that he had malnourished her. The state of Oklahoma accused both Castro-Huerta and his wife of child neglect. Castro-Huerto was sentenced to 35 years in prison.
After being convicted, the Supreme Court ruled that McGirt and Castro-Huerta’s lawyers challenged his conviction, arguing that only the federal government had jurisdiction to prosecute his crime.
While his state appeals court proceedings were pending, a grand federal jury in Oklahoma charged him with the same conduct. He accepted a guilty plea for a seven-year sentence.
In sentencing him Wednesday, Kavanaugh noted that Castro-Huerta “in fact received a reduction in his 28-year sentence as a result of McGirt.”