Supreme Court rejects Tulsa’s request to issue speeding tickets to Native Americans

The Supreme Court has rejected Tulsa, Oklahoma’s request to halt a lower court order allowing the city to issue speeding tickets to Native Americans.

The city is still fighting a ruling against it in the lower court, but had hoped it could still enforce city ordinances without complication while the litigation is pending. But the high court’s move on Friday rejected that request.

The dispute arose over a $150 traffic fine, but the issue could affect the enforcement of other city ordinances in a territory where about one million people live.

Justin Hooper received a speeding ticket in Tulsa in 2018. He was fined $150 and paid the infraction.

Subsequently, though, he challenged the penalty after the Supreme Court issued its 2020 ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma, where the high court ruled 5-4 that the state lacked jurisdiction to prosecute an American Indian man for sex crimes against a child on Indian territory.

The justices ruled it was up to the federal or tribal courts to prosecute such offenses.

Critics, though, have said the ruling has sent shock waves through the state, creating chaos for law enforcement.

Part of the issue is that under the McGirt ruling, an estimated 1.6 million more people are now seen as living on Indian territory. The ruling created a conflict over which law enforcement agencies — state, federal or tribal — have jurisdiction over certain crimes.

About half the state’s lands are home to dozens of tribes. Tulsa, which has a population of more than 400,000, sits predominantly on a reservation. The metropolitan area combined with Tulsa proper is home to just over a million people.

Ninety-five percent of Tulsa, though, is considered Indian country, according to the city’s court filing.

Mr. Hooper reasoned that he was ticketed on the Muscogee Creek reservation and is a member of the Choctaw Nation, a federally recognized tribe, so the city of Tulsa shouldn’t be able to collect on his traffic fine. He took his case to municipal court, which ruled in favor of the city.

Tulsa claims that a federal law from 1898 recognizes all residents of a city have to abide by that city’s ordinances without regard to race.
After losing in municipal court, Mr. Hooper took the issue to federal court, where the district court sided with Tulsa again.

But on appeal, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and said when Oklahoma became a state in 1907, the 1898 law giving city officials power to enforce ordinances was superseded by state law.

Tulsa asked the high court to hold off implementing the 10th Circuit’s decision, allowing city officials to continue to enforce city ordinances while it appealed to the Supreme Court, asking the justices to reconsider Mr. Hooper‘s challenge.

“The consequences for the health and safety of all citizens within these cities are significant,” wrote the city attorney in Tulsa‘s brief.