Muscogee (Creek) Nation Reservation–The Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court ruled in favor of citizenship for Creek Freedmen descendants in a ruling Wednesday that rejected the Muscogee Nation attorney general’s attempt to deny citizenship rights to descendants of Freedmen formerly enslaved by the tribal nation.
“Are we, as a Nation, bound to treaty promises made so many years ago? Today we answer in the affirmative, because that is what Mvskoke law demands,” the Justices wrote in Citizenship Board of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation v. Rhonda K Grayson, et al.
The Court ordered the citizenship applications for Freedmen plaintiffs Rhonda Grayson and Jeff Kennedy to go back in front of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Citizenship Board take back up their applications for citizenship in line with the Treaty of 1866, which applies to both Creeks on the By Blood Dawes Roll and the Freedmen Roll.
“Further, the Court finds that any reference to “by blood” citizenship in the 1979 Muscogee (Creek) Nation Constitution to be UNLAWFUL and VOID AB INITIO.” The phrase refers to a contract that was invalid from the beginning.
Ultimately, the Court struck down a system of deciding criticized as racial apartheid that was passed down from the U.S. government: a divided roll of human beings listed as the “By Blood” Dawes Roll and the Freedmen Roll.
It was used to divide up land for European expansion, and it casted all Freedmen, Creeks of African descent, as well as children of intermarriages into one category.
Muscogee (Creek) Freedmen descendants regain access to citizenship
The plaintiffs had already won their case at the Muscogee (Creek) Nation District Court in 2023, but Muscogee Nation AG Geri Wisner, with the support of Principal Chief David Hill, appealed the case to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court to seek a reversal of the decision.
For over 40 years, Freedmen descendants have waged legal battles and attempts to apply for citizenship after the tribal nation changed its constitution to deny restrict citizenship in 1979, a decision at odds with a treaty the Nation signed with the U.S. government promising to end slavery in its territory.
The treaty of 1866 between the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and the US government was used in the 2020 McGirt v Oklahoma case, which reaffirmed tribal jurisdiction over much of eastern Oklahoma. However, the Muscogee (Creek) Nation continued to defy another part of that treaty, which promised citizenship to Freedmen who were formerly enslaved by the tribal nation and their descendants.
Attorneys for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation argued tribal sovereignty granted them the privilege of altering citizenship eligibility. Meanwhile, civil rights attorney Damario Solomon-Simmons, representing the plaintiffs, warned ignoring parts of the treaty would threaten tribal sovereignty for all tribal nations.
The treaty affirmed Freedmen and their descendants “shall have and enjoy all the rights and privileges of native citizens, including an equal interest in the soil and national funds, and the laws of the said nation shall be equally binding upon and give equal protection to all such persons.”
What’s next?
It’s unclear whether Muscogee (Creek) Nation Attorney General Geri Wisner will appeal the ruling to the federal government, which could threaten the tribal sovereignty ruling in McGirt v. Oklahoma.
Tactics by the Nation to shrink support for the case included blocking elderly Freedmen from stepping inside the courthouse in freezing weather, forcing journalists away from a citizenship office, and Lighthorse Police intimidation. At one point after the 2023 trial, Muscogee (Creek) Nation AG Wisner was herself sanctioned by the Muscogee (Creek) Nation District Judge Denette Mouser for alleged intimidation.
“Thus, the Court’s only inference can be that the true motive of such action was at worst a veiled threat of removal from the bench, or at best an attempt to intimidate the Court prior to its ruling on Plaintiffs’ motion and/or prior to rendering final judgement,” Judge Mouser stated in her sanction order.
Related Stories:
- Black Creek Freedmen win citizenship, Muscogee judge rules
- Muscogee Nation AG “intimidated” judge in Creek Freedmen trial
- These Muscogee citizens support Black Freedmen Citizenship
- Muscogee Nation wants courts to follow and ignore 1866 Treaty
- Judge delays ruling on Black Creeks citizenship
- “This is my birthright,” Black Creeks tell judge on Day 1 of Trial
I think the enroll process should be the simple part. The Freedman will no longer able to claim the label ,”Freedman”, as reference to being Black. They cannot claim “racism”—they are granted the rights of citizenship, thus forget cries of “violation of civil rights. “