High court denies Tulsa's request for stay in Hooper

Aug. 4—The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday denied an emergency request for a stay on a federal circuit court's ruling to stop Tulsa and other cities in eastern Oklahoma from issuing traffic citations to Native Americans.

A temporary stay put in place by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch while the issue was being argued was vacated, allowing the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals' mandate in Hooper v. Tulsa to go into effect.

Gorsuch issued the initial temporary stay on July 26 against the circuit court's rejection of Tulsa's argument that city officers could still prosecute Native Americans for municipal violations, despite the Supreme Court's ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma. Tulsa claims Section 14 of the Curtis Act, a law from 1898 that predates Oklahoma's statehood, gave the city that authority.

The 10th Circuit ruled the Act only applied to Tulsa prior to Oklahoma's statehood, when the city operated under Arkansas law, and that it "no longer applied" in modern times.

The case began after Justin Hooper, a member of the Choctaw Nation, was fined $150 for a traffic violation in 2018 by the Tulsa Police Department. Hooper sought resolution by filing for post-conviction relief following the 2020 decision in McGirt v. Oklahoma. A majority opinion written by Gorsuch stated the Muscogee (Creek) Nation was never disestablished and therefore the state of Oklahoma did not have criminal jurisdiction over crimes committed by Native Americans.

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals has since applied the ruling to seven other tribal nations in eastern Oklahoma.

The city argued the Curtis Act gave the city the authority to prosecute municipal violations committed by Native Americans.

Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr. praised the ruling.

"Today's news from the U.S. Supreme Court affirms what we have said all along: The best way forward is through collaboration, not wasteful legal fights. The 10th circuit's Hooper decision upheld tribal sovereignty and settled federal law, reaffirming that states and municipalities do not have criminal jurisdiction over Indians in Indian Country," said Hoskin. "Once again, we hope elected leaders throughout Oklahoma will join with tribes in meeting our shared public safety goals. I'm calling for collaboration, cooperation and an end to the attacks on tribal sovereignty."

A Tulsa municipal judge and a federal judge for the Northern District of Oklahoma ruled against Hooper before the 10th Circuit decided in Hooper's favor and issued a mandate for the lower district court to reverse its judgment.

The 10th Circuit ordered the Northern District of Oklahoma to reconduct a hearing in the case consistent with the court's mandate.

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh said in the Friday opinion that the Appeals Court has, for now, declined to find for an additional argument raised by Oklahoma that Tulsa may exercise concurrent jurisdiction under the ruling in Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta. That case said the state of Oklahoma shared concurrent jurisdiction with the federal government over non-Native Americans who committed crimes against Natives.

Tulsa argued in its filing with the court the ruling in Castro-Huerta could extend to Native Americans who commit a crime outside of their enrolled tribal nation's boundaries. That was the case with Hooper, a Choctaw tribal member allegedly caught speeding within the boundaries of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation.

"On remand in the district court, the city may presumably raise that argument," Kavanaugh wrote. "Moreover, as I understand it, nothing in the decision of the Court of Appeals prohibits the city from continuing to enforce its municipal laws against all persons, including Indians, as the litigation progresses."

A hearing on the matter in the Northern District of Oklahoma had not been scheduled as of Friday