This is a real interesting story coming from the Eastern part of the state. It looks like the tribal police were in the wrong and created a lot of panic in the process. I wonder if this will spur more conversations on the role of tribal police.

https://www.fox23.com/news/tribal-police-attempt-to-arrest-okmulgee-co-jailer-at-work-legal-stalemate-ensues/article_9604e12e-9fa7-11ee-b7a1-5385e5c17166.html

This is a real interesting story coming from the Eastern part of the state. It looks like the tribal police were in the wrong and created a lot of panic in the process. I wonder if this will spur more conversations on the role of tribal police.

https://www.fox23.com/news/tribal-police-attempt-to-arrest-okmulgee-co-jailer-at-work-legal-stalemate-ensues/article_9604e12e-9fa7-11ee-b7a1-5385e5c17166.html

Tribal police arrest non-tribal members all the time. Try stealing or doing drugs in a casino.

The bigger deal here is Okmulgee jail cops refusing a legal arrest warrant.

This is a real interesting story coming from the Eastern part of the state. It looks like the tribal police were in the wrong and created a lot of panic in the process. I wonder if this will spur more conversations on the role of tribal police.

https://www.fox23.com/news/tribal-police-attempt-to-arrest-okmulgee-co-jailer-at-work-legal-stalemate-ensues/article_9604e12e-9fa7-11ee-b7a1-5385e5c17166.html

Where does it look to you that the tribal police were in the wrong?

Have tribal members claimed the same thing for being arrested on non-tribal land?

If not, this is a nothing burger, and the tribal police were not in the wrong.

Have tribal members claimed the same thing for being arrested on non-tribal land?

If not, this is a nothing burger, and the tribal police were not in the wrong.

this is so LOL

Tribal police arrest non-tribal members all the time. Try stealing or doing drugs in a casino.

The bigger deal here is Okmulgee jail cops refusing a legal arrest warrant.

this is not correct at all .. they can "hold" non tribal members until state or federal authority's come and arrest them

Something here is more than meets the eye and the Nation's request doesn't really seem to pass the smell test. Tribes have the authority to arrest non members within their jurisdiction, but only for the purpose of delivering them to state authorities for prosecution. So what was so important about arresting this jailer to possibly deliver him to the place he was already working? Especially what justifies blocking county law enforcement from their own facilities and pointing guns? Honestly, these tribal officers could be prosecuted for a number of felonies for this. Extremely stupid and unprofessional for even assuming everything they claimed was true actually happened.

You don't draw and point a weapon if you're not willing to kill--and if they were willing to kill fellow law enforcement officers over what looks to be like a misdemeanor arrest, that's just insane. They should all be fired at a minimum.

Something here is more than meets the eye and the Nation's request doesn't really seem to pass the smell test. Tribes have the authority to arrest non members within their jurisdiction, but only for the purpose of delivering them to state authorities for prosecution. So what was so important about arresting this jailer to possibly deliver him to the place he was already working? Especially what justifies blocking county law enforcement from their own facilities and pointing guns? Honestly, these tribal officers could be prosecuted for a number of felonies for this. Extremely stupid and unprofessional for even assuming everything they claimed was true actually happened.

You don't draw and point a weapon if you're not willing to kill--and if they were willing to kill fellow law enforcement officers over what looks to be like a misdemeanor arrest, that's just insane. They should all be fired at a minimum.

I read in the Sheriff's Office response that no guns were drawn.

Tribal police arrest non-tribal members all the time. Try stealing or doing drugs in a casino.

The bigger deal here is Okmulgee jail cops refusing a legal arrest warrant.

Right, totally understand on their premises. But outside of their trust-land my understanding is they have very little real authority. They basically just hold you till the proper jurisdiction picks you up.


Where does it look to you that the tribal police were in the wrong?

Again what Midtowner said. Why did they make this big scene when they knew they'd have to turn the person right over to the proper authorities? Why did they block county vehicles?




My guess is the county has been a bit of a thorn with all this McGirt situation going on, and the tribal police seized a bit of an opportunity to show that, and in doing so overreacted to where they are the ones probably more at wrong. Although I got a feeling this jailer really did do something to warrant being arrested, and once everyone involved realizes that everyone just wants to see people held accountable, cooler heads will prevail and realize there was probably a lot of misunderstanding going on here. But this is all just 100% my speculation.

Have tribal members claimed the same thing for being arrested on non-tribal land?

If not, this is a nothing burger, and the tribal police were not in the wrong.

I'm not sure why this subject has everyone scrambling to their respective camps like this. Tribal police and county sheriffs are not equivalent. You are trying to argue that they are and they just aren't. It's certainly not a nothing burger. What would you say if the Canadian County Sheriff drove its MRAP down to the Oklahoma County Jail, blocked the entrance to the jail with it and attempted to execute an arrest warrant? That would be insane--the Canadian County Sheriff would be 100% in the wrong--and that's exactly what happened here.

this is not correct at all .. they can "hold" non tribal members until state or federal authority's come and arrest them

No. Wrong. Tribal police can arrest anyone for crimes on tribal land. If that crime is a felony DOJ is the prosecutor.

Something here is more than meets the eye and the Nation's request doesn't really seem to pass the smell test. Tribes have the authority to arrest non members within their jurisdiction, but only for the purpose of delivering them to state authorities for prosecution.

No. Wrong. Yes, tribal police can arrest anyone for crimes on tribal land. If that crime is a felony DOJ is the prosecutor. If that crime is a misdemeanor you go to tribal District Count and the tribal prosecutor. The state is NOT involved.

https://creekdistrictcourt.com/

The interesting thing here is, the Muscogee Nation doesn't have a jail. So they contract with the Okmulgee County Jail to hold tribal prisoners.

Right, totally understand on their premises. But outside of their trust-land my understanding is they have very little real authority. They basically just hold you till the proper jurisdiction picks you up.



Again what Midtowner said. Why did they make this big scene when they knew they'd have to turn the person right over to the proper authorities? Why did they block county vehicles?




My guess is the county has been a bit of a thorn with all this McGirt situation going on, and the tribal police seized a bit of an opportunity to show that, and in doing so overreacted to where they are the ones probably more at wrong. Although I got a feeling this jailer really did do something to warrant being arrested, and once everyone involved realizes that everyone just wants to see people held accountable, cooler heads will prevail and realize there was probably a lot of misunderstanding going on here. But this is all just 100% my speculation.

According to McGirt almost of eastern Oklahoma is tribal land. And midtowner is wrong about turning over to state authorities, that is not how it works. Now the weird part is that the Muscogee jail IS the Okmulgee County Jail (the tribe contracts with Okmulgee to hold tribal prisoners).

I'm not sure why this subject has everyone scrambling to their respective camps like this. Tribal police and county sheriffs are not equivalent. You are trying to argue that they are and they just aren't. It's certainly not a nothing burger. What would you say if the Canadian County Sheriff drove its MRAP down to the Oklahoma County Jail, blocked the entrance to the jail with it and attempted to execute an arrest warrant? That would be insane--the Canadian County Sheriff would be 100% in the wrong--and that's exactly what happened here.

No, tribal police and sheriffs are not equivalent. Tribal police are more equivalent to state police.

According to McGirt almost of eastern Oklahoma is tribal land. And midtowner is wrong about turning over to state authorities, that is not how it works. Now the weird part is that the Muscogee jail IS the Okmulgee County Jail (the tribe contracts with Okmulgee to hold tribal prisoners).

I suppose my understanding was that boundary you are referring to is more just on who has jurisdiction to process tribal members. For everyone else nothing changed. Now if this was tribal trust land or a casino, I understand they are the police there just as much OU police is the police on their campus. Maybe not the best example but it’s how I thought it works. Again I’m no expert, just trying to explain why I said what I did based off of how it d heard it explained to me.

The whole thing is a mess. I just want to make sure people that do crimes are held accountable.

No. Wrong. Yes, tribal police can arrest anyone for crimes on tribal land. If that crime is a felony DOJ is the prosecutor. If that crime is a misdemeanor you go to tribal District Count and the tribal prosecutor. The state is NOT involved.

https://creekdistrictcourt.com/

The interesting thing here is, the Muscogee Nation doesn't have a jail. So they contract with the Okmulgee County Jail to hold tribal prisoners.

Nope.


Tribes have inherent authority to exercise criminal jurisdiction over tribal members and to arrest and detain non-Indians for delivery to state or federal authorities for prosecution. These tribal police powers are generally limited to the reservation. Tribal police are often critical to resolving criminal cases referred to state and federal agencies because they usually discover the crime, interview witnesses, and understand the circumstances involved.

Commonly, tribal police department funding, administration, and employees are based on the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, (Public Law 93-638 or P.L. 638). This law allows tribes to assume responsibility for many programs previously administered by the federal government, including law enforcement. P.L. 638 agencies operate with tribal employees under contract and with financial assistance from the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA).

Some tribally operated agencies have a self-governance compact with the BIA. This arrangement provides block grant payments, allowing for more tribal control than the line-item funding of P.L. 638 contracts. Full tribal control over law enforcement services exists where such services are entirely funded by the tribal government.

https://bjs.ojp.gov/topics/tribal-crime-and-justice/tribal-law-enforcement#0-0

And yeah, state = State (capitalized) or federal depending on the case. The point is, that where a non-indian is concerned, all these police would be doing would be arresting the non-indian to deliver him to the place he already worked. There's no universe where blocking county offices is anywhere in the neighborhood of appropriate for that purpose. They could easily refer charges to the District Attorney for prosecution, and if the District Attorney thought he could make the case, I'm sure he'd know where to find the Defendant with a District Court arrest warrant.

No, tribal police and sheriffs are not equivalent. Tribal police are more equivalent to state police.

The sheriffs would have concurrent jurisdiction with tribal police over all persons within the County, Indians and non-Indians alike. Tribal police have very limited powers when it comes to non-Indians. And I'm not really sure about that with State police. State police have jurisdiction over the entire State, tribal police have very limited territorial jurisdiction.

We're in a post-Castro-Huerta world now.

So what I got was Okmulgee cops refused an assist call from the Light Horse police on a fentynel possesion traffic stop. That was the first wrong of under reacting. The second wrong of under reacting was the County Sheriff refusing to accept a lawful prisoner even though the tribe pays for the county to house prisoners.
What am I missing in this post C-H world?

Nope.



https://bjs.ojp.gov/topics/tribal-crime-and-justice/tribal-law-enforcement#0-0

And yeah, state = State (capitalized) or federal depending on the case. The point is, that where a non-indian is concerned, all these police would be doing would be arresting the non-indian to deliver him to the place he already worked. There's no universe where blocking county offices is anywhere in the neighborhood of appropriate for that purpose. They could easily refer charges to the District Attorney for prosecution, and if the District Attorney thought he could make the case, I'm sure he'd know where to find the Defendant with a District Court arrest warrant.

The last sentence that you posted is key:
Full tribal control over law enforcement services exists where such services are entirely funded by the tribal government.

The Muscogee Nation has a 70 officer police force and a full court system with four district court judges and a supreme court

The last sentence that you posted is key:
Full tribal control over law enforcement services exists where such services are entirely funded by the tribal government.

The Muscogee Nation has a 70 officer police force and a full court system with four district court judges and a supreme court

lol

I have a question for anyone that may or may not know. I've done some more reading into the Tribes recently cause I find the subject interesting, specifically on sovereignty. I've seen the commercials for their United for Oklahoma website so I thought it might be an additional resource for me. Below is an excerpt taken from that website on the page about sovereignty.

The core sovereignty of tribes has remained unchanged over the years. Tribal nations have the ability to determine who their citizenry is, to regulate the activities within their borders and to interact with other sovereign governments.

So my question is, could the Tribes deem any person that lives and resides within their historical boundary as a citizen of that respective Tribe? I understand that we sometimes use citizenship and residency somewhat interchangeable, so wasn't sure exactly how that works. I think people generally consider themselves citizens of the city or state they live in, but wasn't sure if there is a specific legal definition here and terms get conflated many times or if it was possible for the tribe to just tell people that live in Chickasaw country hey now you are also citizens of the tribe. If that was possible I could see that opening up another discussion on jurisdiction, but at the same time might help clarify some things as well.

I believe citizenship is at the national level. I'm a citizen of the USA, but reside in Oklahoma - that seems to be the way it works.

The last sentence that you posted is key:
Full tribal control over law enforcement services exists where such services are entirely funded by the tribal government.

The Muscogee Nation has a 70 officer police force and a full court system with four district court judges and a supreme court

Law enforcement =/= tribal courts. I think you have a fundamental lack of understanding of basic definitions here. The tribal courts do not have jurisdiction in this case, it would be prosecuted in the Okmulgee County District Court. But I'm only a member of one tribal bar association. How many are you a member of?

I believe citizenship is at the national level. I'm a citizen of the USA, but reside in Oklahoma - that seems to be the way it works.

Right, as far as internationally it would always stay that way. I'm assuming tribe members are still US citizens, as well as citizens of the tribe. So if it was applicable for current tribe members, wouldn't it be applicable for future tribe members? So I guess my thought is they could extend the same sort of membership that current tribe members have, but make it for anyone that lives and resides in the boundary.

Here is an excerpt from justive.gov

Are American Indians and Alaska Natives citizens?

American Indians and Alaska Natives are citizens of the United States and of the states in which they reside. They are also citizens of the Tribes according to the criteria established by each Tribe.

https://www.justice.gov/otj/about-native-americans

From reading this it sounds like the use of the word citizen is indeed extended to the state you live in. Meaning you could be a citizen of Tuttle, Grady County, Chickasaw Nation, Oklahoma, USA...all at the same time

So maybe it is plausible the tribes could extend citizenship to all people who live within their boundary.

^^^ Interesting, guess it gets into the weeds as to how far the term "citizen" applies in a legal sense, not just a conversational sense. Also, tribal membership/citizenship (not sure if those terms are completely interchangeable) is a completely separate situation that requires more than just living within reservation boundaries, isn't it?

^^^ Interesting, guess it gets into the weeds as to how far the term "citizen" applies in a legal sense, not just a conversational sense. Also, tribal membership/citizenship (not sure if those terms are completely interchangeable) is a completely separate situation that requires more than just living within reservation boundaries, isn't it?

It is, so that's why my question remains, could they simply change it to include more people? My understanding is many tribes have relaxed their requirements in the past, specifically with blood quantum requirements as that practice is considered problematic at the very least.

It is, so that's why my question remains, could they simply change it to include more people? My understanding is many tribes have relaxed their requirements in the past, specifically with blood quantum requirements as that practice is considered problematic at the very least.

Within the rules established for Federally recognized tribes, I think they can accept who they want when they want.

They traditionally have not wanted to do so. I think the tribes have not had the financial resources to expand services to expanded tribal members. No reason to add more people you can't support.

Now that some tribes are doing better financially, the reason not to expand becomes the opposite. No reason to give money more than they have to just because they have finally gotten a little.

Within the rules established for Federally recognized tribes, I think they can accept who they want when they want.

They traditionally have not wanted to do so. I think the tribes have not had the financial resources to expand services to expanded tribal members. No reason to add more people you can't support.

Now that some tribes are doing better financially, the reason not to expand becomes the opposite. No reason to give money more than they have to just because they have finally gotten a little.

I mostly agree with your comments.

The thought I have on your last comment is for those tribes that are doing very well, the reason to extend tribal citizenship could be to further their sovereignty. Completely controlling their boundaries similar to a state would really change peoples perceptions on the strength of the tribes. From my understanding the tribes see themselves as equal to the state of Oklahoma. I think in reality this is a stretch because again they don't really control their jurisdiction the same way other states do and in that regard they are dependent on the state of Oklahoma. This affirmation of their reservations has changed IMO the status quo I grew up with, that the tribes reservations weren't really reservations in the traditional sense. Since Mcgirt, the Tribes seem to have a renewed since of establishing their place as equals to the state of Oklahoma. If that is indeed the case the next step may be for them to claim all those living within their boundaries as tribal citizens.

My thought is if I'm a non-native, living in a newly affirmed reservation, I still don't really care about the tribes, because I don't have a say in any matters. Sure there are plenty of projects the tribes do that both directly and indirectly effect non-natives, this isn't the same IMO. Now if all of a sudden I can vote on projects similar to how I can for the city, county, and state I live in, I think you get a lot more bye in from the population.

With all that being said, I can definitely see why the Tribes and their citizens wouldn't want to incorporate non-natives. Non-native interests could slowly erode those and usurp those interests traditionally help by the Tribe. My guess is this is the sole major reason keeping such a thing from happening. But at the end of the day I don't see how these Tribes are every seen as more than what they are if they have less rights than every other government in the USA, and by that I'm referring to their jurisdiction over non-natives.

I mostly agree with your comments.

The thought I have on your last comment is for those tribes that are doing very well, the reason to extend tribal citizenship could be to further their sovereignty. Completely controlling their boundaries similar to a state would really change peoples perceptions on the strength of the tribes. From my understanding the tribes see themselves as equal to the state of Oklahoma. .

the issue with this idea of course is that the tribes would then be giving up control of them selves .. if they extend citizenship the new members would out number the actually members of the tribe .

I mostly agree with your comments.

The thought I have on your last comment is for those tribes that are doing very well, the reason to extend tribal citizenship could be to further their sovereignty. Completely controlling their boundaries similar to a state would really change peoples perceptions on the strength of the tribes. From my understanding the tribes see themselves as equal to the state of Oklahoma. I think in reality this is a stretch because again they don't really control their jurisdiction the same way other states do and in that regard they are dependent on the state of Oklahoma. This affirmation of their reservations has changed IMO the status quo I grew up with, that the tribes reservations weren't really reservations in the traditional sense. Since Mcgirt, the Tribes seem to have a renewed since of establishing their place as equals to the state of Oklahoma. If that is indeed the case the next step may be for them to claim all those living within their boundaries as tribal citizens.

My thought is if I'm a non-native, living in a newly affirmed reservation, I still don't really care about the tribes, because I don't have a say in any matters. Sure there are plenty of projects the tribes do that both directly and indirectly effect non-natives, this isn't the same IMO. Now if all of a sudden I can vote on projects similar to how I can for the city, county, and state I live in, I think you get a lot more bye in from the population.

With all that being said, I can definitely see why the Tribes and their citizens wouldn't want to incorporate non-natives. Non-native interests could slowly erode those and usurp those interests traditionally help by the Tribe. My guess is this is the sole major reason keeping such a thing from happening. But at the end of the day I don't see how these Tribes are every seen as more than what they are if they have less rights than every other government in the USA, and by that I'm referring to their jurisdiction over non-natives.

As a thought exercise I would agree with you.

I think there are few tribes that would have the ability to do what you are suggesting. From a governance and economic standpoint, they aren't built for that scale.

I would suggest the tribes are focused on being sovereign. And different from the state. That doesn't necessarily mean equal. Just sovereign, and different.

the issue with this idea of course is that the tribes would then be giving up control of them selves .. if they extend citizenship the new members would out number the actually members of the tribe .

Right, I mentioned something very similar in my last paragraph.

In general it's an interesting concept, and at the core of it wasn't sure if it was even legal for them to do.



With all that being said, I can definitely see why the Tribes and their citizens wouldn't want to incorporate non-natives. Non-native interests could slowly erode those and usurp those interests traditionally help by the Tribe. My guess is this is the sole major reason keeping such a thing from happening. But at the end of the day I don't see how these Tribes are every seen as more than what they are if they have less rights than every other government in the USA, and by that I'm referring to their jurisdiction over non-natives.

So maybe it is plausible the tribes could extend citizenship to all people who live within their boundary.

They have the right to extend citizenship to anyone they want, although every group I've ever worked with employs one of two methods--either you have an ancestor traceable to the Dawes rolls or you can prove a certain blood quantum. Maybe both.