Murphy v. Royal
- Thread starter anon_xl72qcu5isp39
- Start date
It’s presently stayed. AG has said he will take it all the way to the Supreme Court. I can’t see SCOTUS basically allowing the near entirety of the state (over half) be under tribal/federal jurisdiction. The weird thing is the decision just applied old law about disestablishment of reservations. I think ultimately, the SCOTUS will set this as the outer limits of de facto disestablishment as a opposed to explicit Congressional disestablishment.
We’ve been gameplanning what we will do going forward if it isn’t overturned. Looking like we will cross deputize with BIA so we can have jurisdiction for all the Indian Major Crimes Act offenses....which is what we would primarily be involved in. I don’t know if there will be a reopening of a lot of cases or not. Frankly, that is a DA/US Attorney problem...not mine.
We were involved in the original investigation of that case, btw.
I just can't believe that opinion. The 10th Cir. closed it out practically begging the Supremes to weigh in.
Do you know off the top of your head whether the other tribes have a different history regarding disestablishment?
Did the research. They are all pretty similar. At least the larger tribe (Choctaw, Cherokee, Chickasha). I discovered no explicit Congressional enactments disestablishing any other reservations. A good number of the smaller tribes never actually had tribal reservation land though. When they got federally recognized, it went straight to individual allotments.
