The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal on Monday from a Muscogee Nation citizen challenging tax laws in Oklahoma.
RELATED: Oklahoma Supreme Court says McGirt ruling does not exempt tribal citizens from state income taxes
Last year, the Oklahoma Supreme Court sided with the Oklahoma Tax Commission in the case where Alicia Stroble argued she was exempt from paying state income taxes because she’s a tribal member living and working on the Muscogee reservation.
Stroble referenced the 2020 landmark Supreme Court ruling McGirt v. Oklahoma, which ruled many of the reservations in eastern Oklahoma were never disestablished.
But critics, including Gov. Kevin Stitt, have argued that only applies to crimes under the Major Crimes Act, not civil cases like tax law.
The US Supreme Court’s decision sends the case back to Oklahoma, which already ruled Stroble is not exempt.
In a statement, Stitt said the decision reinforces that the McGirt ruling does not apply to state civil or tax jurisdiction.
“This is about fairness for all four million Oklahomans,” said Stitt. “Time and time again, the courts have limited the McGirt decision, rightfully upholding state jurisdiction. This decision made it clear that someone’s tax bill will not be based on their race.”
Stitt said the ruling allows the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s decision in Stroble v. Oklahoma Tax Commission to stand and signals that courts will continue to limit McGirt to criminal cases under the Major Crimes Act.
Cherokee Nation Attorney General Chad Harsha released the following statement:
“The Cherokee Nation is disappointed by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today declining to review Stroble v. Oklahoma Tax Commission, a flawed state court ruling that is inconsistent with federal law precedent and an attempt to minimize tribal sovereignty.
Our reservation and the reservations of many of our fellow tribes in Oklahoma are Indian Country, as affirmed by the McGirt decision and related cases. There is clear law surrounding the taxation of tribal citizens living and working on tribal land, and the Oklahoma court’s decision ran counter to those policies.
The proper way forward is to tackle our shared priorities together while respecting treaty rights and state and federal law. Tribal nations make Oklahoma strong and invest millions of dollars into our roads, schools, law enforcement agencies and other services, and we are committed to working with our state and local partners to continue to do so in a manner that respects the law and tribal sovereignty.”
Muscogee (Creek) Nation Principal Chief David Hill released this statement:
“We had hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would step in to address an egregiously wrong Oklahoma Supreme Court decision that disregards decades of settled federal law. While the Court declined review, this matter is far from resolved.
Federal law governing state taxation of Indians is clear and has been reaffirmed repeatedly over time. When a state court ignores that law, it undermines legal certainty and invites confusion and conflict. That is not acceptable for tribal citizens, and it is not acceptable for the State of Oklahoma. We are reviewing all available options, including seeking a remedy in federal court.
The Muscogee (Creek) Nation will continue to stand up for its citizens and for the principle that the law applies equally—regardless of political agendas. Recent attempts by Governor Stitt to characterize these long-established legal protections as a “racial preference” are simply false.
The United States Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that tribal citizenship is a political classification, not a racial one. Tribal nations are diverse, with citizens of many races and backgrounds. What unites our citizens is citizenship in a sovereign tribal nation, not race. The State of Oklahoma’s ongoing pattern of selectively complying with settled law poses a danger to all Oklahomans. The rule of law cannot be optional.”
Stitt has argued that tribes have tried to use the McGirt ruling to expand other jurisdictional powers.
Several tribes though argue that the ruling affirms what areas are “Indian Country” which have specific protections under federal law.
