OKMULGEE, Okla. — In a landmark decision cementing a new era of inclusion and justice, the Muscogee Creek Nation Supreme Court on Tuesday denied a petition to rehear arguments aimed at excluding Creek Freedmen descendants from tribal citizenship.
The August 20th order leaves in place the Court’s historic July 23 ruling affirming that the 1866 Treaty between the United States and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation guarantees citizenship to Freedmen descendants. That ruling struck down the “by blood” language in the Nation’s Constitution, declaring it void from the beginning because it conflicted with treaty obligations.
“Final. The law is settled. Article II governs, the ‘by blood’ restriction is void, and it is time to implement—not obstruct. Citizenship cards must be issued immediately. Any delay or noncompliance will result in us seeking immediate enforcement from the Muscogee (Creek) Nation Supreme Court,” Attorney Damario Solomon-Simmons, Lead Counsel, said in a statement released to The Black Wall Street Times.
The Board’s Challenge
Following the July decision, the Nation’s Citizenship Board filed a petition for rehearing. The Board argued the Nation retained sovereign authority to exclude Freedmen, that the Court had overstepped by “rewriting” the Constitution, and that removing “by blood” would destabilize the Nation’s government. It also opposed extending the ruling to future citizenship applicants.
The Court’s Response
The justices firmly rejected those claims, reaffirming that:
- The Treaty of 1866 explicitly extended citizenship to Freedmen descendants, creating a binding obligation that cannot be undone without an act of Congress.
- The Court, as the final arbiter of the Nation’s Constitution, had a duty to reconcile conflicting provisions, which required invalidating the “by blood” requirement.
- The ruling applies solely to citizenship rights and does not alter blood quantum rules for public office or other matters.
The Court emphasized its constitutional responsibility:
“At the heart of this controversy lies the question: what should be done when a constitutional provision conflicts with a valid treaty?” the Court wrote. “… The ‘by blood’ limitation language in Article III, Section 2 was inconsistent with the Treaty of 1866 and must be found void ab initio.”
A Historic Journey Toward Justice
This latest decision concludes a years-long legal and emotional battle for justice. As previously reported by The Black Wall Street Times, Freedmen plaintiffs first secured victory in 2023 when Judge Denette Mouser ruled that excluding Freedmen descendants violated treaty obligations.
That ruling paved the way for a direct appeal to the Muscogee Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments in May and issued its powerful decision two months later. In the wake of the July ruling, Freedmen plaintiffs celebrated outside the courthouse, expressing a collective desire to come home to their Nation after generations of exclusion.
“Today affirms our dignity and our ancestors’ truth. With this door finally open, let’s choose healing—restore our citizenship, rebuild trust, and walk forward as one people,” Rhonda Grayson, Plaintiff and Black Creek, said.
“This is the exhale our families have waited generations for. We’re ready to work with leaders who are tired of division and committed to unity and reconciliation,” Jeff Kennedy, Plaintiff and Black Creek, adds.
“We Won! The Supreme Court of the Muscogee Creek Nation has denied the Petition for Rehearing in the case of Citizenship Board of the Muscogee Creek Nation v. Rhonda K. Grayson and Jeffrey D. Kennedy. This means the original ruling stands, a major victory for Creek Freedmen descendants. You can continue submitting your citizenship applications! God is good!
Muscogee Creek Indian Freedmen Band-Black Creeks
Finality and Impact
The denial of rehearing makes the July ruling final and binding. For the first time in modern history, Creek Freedmen descendants are firmly and legally recognized as citizens of the Muscogee (Creek) Nation—restoring rights promised more than 150 years ago in the aftermath of emancipation.
The ruling follows similar developments in Cherokee Nation and marks a major milestone in the ongoing struggle to recognize Black tribal citizens across Indian Country.
This story is developing. Check back for statements from plaintiffs and their attorney.
This ruling was issued today and the story is still developing. Check back later for statements from the plaintiffs and their attorney.