The Murder Case That Shook the Supreme Court and Restored a Tribe’s Sovereignty
In a landmark decision that reshaped the legal landscape for Native American tribes, the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma (2020) reaffirmed the existence of the Muscogee reservation in Oklahoma. What started as a criminal appeal by Jimcy McGirt, a Seminole Nation tribal citizen, spiraled into a historic legal battle that would redefine tribal sovereignty and criminal jurisdiction for multiple tribes in the state.
But the roots of this case run deeper than McGirt’s own conviction. In fact, the fight for tribal jurisdiction began years earlier with a gruesome murder case.
A Murder Case That Sparked a Legal Revolution
In 1999, a brutal murder in Oklahoma led to the conviction of Patrick Murphy, a member of the Muscogee Nation, who was sentenced to death in state court. However, his legal team raised a startling argument: Oklahoma had no jurisdiction to prosecute him because the crime took place on Muscogee land. According to federal law, states lack authority over crimes involving Native Americans on tribal land—only tribal courts or the federal government can prosecute such cases.
Oklahoma pushed back, claiming that the Muscogee reservation no longer existed. What followed was a years-long legal battle that made its way through the state courts, the federal courts, and eventually landed before the Supreme Court in 2018.
Why Murphy’s Case Wasn’t the One to Settle the Debate
The Supreme Court failed to resolve Murphy’s case, leaving many wondering why. Legal experts believe the justices were deadlocked in a tie vote due to Justice Neil Gorsuch’s recusal, as he had previously heard the case in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Then, in a surprising twist, the Court took up a different but similar case—that of Jimcy McGirt. Unlike Murphy, McGirt had been convicted of sexually abusing a child and was serving a life sentence. His argument mirrored Murphy’s: Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction over his crimes because they occurred on tribal land.
The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling in McGirt’s case confirmed what Murphy’s legal team had long argued—Congress had never disestablished the Muscogee reservation. And that decision would have far-reaching consequences beyond just one man’s conviction.
The Fallout: Hundreds of Cases and a Shift in Power
The ruling meant Oklahoma no longer had jurisdiction over crimes involving Native Americans on tribal land. Instead, prosecution of such cases would fall under federal or tribal authority. While Oklahoma officials had warned that thousands of convicted criminals might walk free, the reality was far less dramatic—only 68 people were released as a result of the decision.
Both Murphy and McGirt were ultimately prosecuted under federal law, with Murphy receiving a life sentence for murder and kidnapping, and McGirt taking a plea deal that resulted in a 30-year sentence with credit for time served.
Tribal Leaders and the Burden of Justice
The decision placed tribal leaders in a difficult position. While the ruling restored a measure of tribal sovereignty, it also meant their legal battle was tied to the cases of individuals convicted of horrific crimes. Former Muscogee Nation Principal Chief James Floyd acknowledged the weight of this reality, as he personally knew members of the murder victim’s family.
But the fight for sovereignty often unfolds through criminal law. Many of the most significant legal precedents for tribal jurisdiction have come through criminal cases because they directly challenge the government’s authority over Native lands.
A Ripple Effect Across Oklahoma
The McGirt ruling didn’t just affect the Muscogee Nation. It set off a legal chain reaction, leading to similar rulings for the Cherokee, Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw Nations, as well as other tribes with smaller reservations in northeastern Oklahoma. Ultimately, the ruling resulted in the largest restoration of tribal land in U.S. history—covering 19 million acres, an area larger than nine states.
The Future of Tribal Justice
For Native American tribes, the decision was more than just a legal victory—it was a step in the ongoing process of reclaiming their rights. Tribes quickly moved to expand their court systems, revise their criminal codes, and hire more prosecutors, defenders, and victim advocates.
Choctaw Nation prosecutor Kara Bacon, who previously worked in the state system, highlighted how the shift allowed tribal courts to focus more on rehabilitation rather than excessive punishment. The goal, she explained, is to break the cycle of incarceration and create a justice system that serves tribal communities.
Rebuilding What Was Lost
For generations, Native American tribes have fought to reclaim what was taken from them. The McGirt decision is not the beginning or the end of that fight, but it represents a significant step toward restoring the sovereignty that was stripped away over a century ago.
As tribal nations continue to rebuild their governments, languages, and cultures, the Supreme Court’s ruling serves as a powerful reminder: sovereignty is not just a legal principle—it’s a living, breathing right that Native communities have fought to preserve for generations. And now, after more than a century, they have reclaimed a piece of what was once lost.
