Muscogee Nation court rules descendants of enslaved people are entitled to citizenship
The court found that the tribal nation's citizenship board violated an 1866 treaty when it denied the applications of Rhonda Grayson and Jeffrey Kennedy in 2019 because they could not identify a lineal descendant of the tribe.
'Are we, as a Nation, bound to treaty promises made so many years ago? Today, we answer in the affirmative, because this is what Mvskoke law demands,' the court wrote in its opinion.
The Muscogee Nation is one of five tribes in Oklahoma that once practiced slavery, and in that 1866 treaty with the U.S. government, the tribe both abolished it and granted citizenship to the formerly enslaved. But in 1979, the tribal nation adopted a constitution that restricted membership to the descendants of people listed as 'Muscogee (Creek) Indians by blood' on the Dawes Rolls, a census of members of the five tribes created around 1900.
When the Dawes Rolls were created, people were listed on two separate rolls: those who were Muscogee and those who were identified by the U.S. government as Freedmen. In its ruling Wednesday, the court remanded the matter back to the Muscogee Nation's citizenship board and directed it to apply the Treaty of 1866 to Grayson and Kennedy's applications, as well as any future applicants who can trace an ancestor to either roll.
The decision could create a path to tribal citizenship for thousands of new members who are not Muscogee by blood.
The ruling is a long-awaited affirmation of their ancestors and their rightful place in the Muscogee Nation, said Rhonda Grayson.
'While this victory honors our past, it also offers a meaningful opportunity for healing and reconciliation. It's time now to come together, rebuild trust, and move forward as one united Nation, ensuring future generations never again face exclusion or erasure," she said in a statement to The Associated Press.
'When I heard the ruling, I felt generations of my family exhale at once," Kennedy added in a statement. 'Our ancestors signed that treaty in good faith, and today the Court finally honored their word.'
The court also found that any reference of 'by blood' in the Muscogee Nation's constitution is unlawful, which could mean the tribe will have to overhaul parts of the governing document. One provision of the constitution requires that citizens be at least one quarter Muscogee 'by blood' to run for office.
'We are currently reviewing the order to understand its basis as well as its implications for our processes,' Muscogee Nation Chief David Hill said in a statement. 'It may be necessary to ask for a reconsideration of this order to receive clarity so that we can ensure that we move forward in a legal, constitutional manner.'
Successful legal cases were brought against two of the five tribes, the Seminole Nation and the Cherokee Nation, which have since granted citizenship to Freedmen descendants. But how that citizenship is implemented could come down to politics, said Jonathon Velie, an attorney who worked on behalf of Freedmen in both cases.
The roughly 2,500 Freedmen citizens in the Seminole Nation are not allowed to run for higher office and do not have access to certain resources, like tribal housing and education assistance. The 17,000 Freedmen citizens in the Cherokee Nation, however, have been embraced by the last two administrations and are given the full benefits of tribal members.
When it comes to the U.S. Department of the Interior, which oversees many of the resources owed to tribes through treaty rights, the Freedmen citizens in both tribes are the same, said Velie — their tribes just honor their citizenship differently.
'I hope the (Muscogee) Creek Nation welcomes them back in, because what they won today wasn't the U.S. Government or the U.S. courts telling them, they told themselves in their own judicial system," Velie said.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
5 minutes ago
- The Hill
Bolivia will choose a new president but environmental activists see little hope of progress
BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — Bolivia's upcoming presidential election will mark a shift from nearly two decades of socialist rule, but many Indigenous and environmental leaders doubt it will bring progress in stopping deforestation, fires or pollution in the Amazon. The Oct. 19 runoff pits centrist Sen. Rodrigo Paz against right-wing former president Jorge 'Tuto' Quiroga — two contenders promising change but rooted in an economic model critics say has long fueled environmental damage in one of South America's most biodiverse nations. The Amazon spans nine countries and plays a crucial role in absorbing carbon and regulating climate patterns worldwide. Approximately 8% of the Amazon is in Bolivia. Scientists warn that deforestation is pushing parts of the forest toward a tipping point where it could shift into savanna. The election feels like a choice between two threats, according to Ruth Alipaz Cuqui, coordinator of the Indigenous alliance CONTIOCAP and a member of the Uchupiamona community. She said governments of all stripes have ignored Indigenous well-being. 'Agreements are signed, commitments are made, laws and decrees are passed, but in the territory there is absolutely nothing applied,' she said. Quiroga's campaign told The Associated Press he would tighten controls on forest fires, promote sustainable agriculture, expand biofuel production, and encourage reforestation to curb high deforestation rates. He also calls for using carbon and green bonds — tools to raise money to fund conservation efforts. Paz's team did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Environment has paid a price for economic policies Evo Morales — Bolivia's first Indigenous president — often invoked Pachamama, the Indigenous concept of Mother Earth as a living being that sustains life, and rose to power by championing Indigenous rights and environmental protection. But his socialist governments also expanded exports of soy, beef, gas and minerals to fund social programs. And his administration allied with agribusiness and ranching elites, loosened land-clearing restrictions and promoted infrastructure projects that opened new frontiers in the Amazon. Bolivia is one of the Amazon basin's fastest-deforesting countries. Forest loss spiked in 2019, when Morales eased burning rules and legalized agricultural clearing, fueling massive wildfires that wiped out nearly a million hectares (about 3,860 square miles). The destruction has continued as cattle ranching, soy farming, logging and mining push deeper into Indigenous lands. In 2024, fires scorched more than 10 million hectares — about 38,600 square miles, or roughly the size of Iceland — and Bolivia recorded the world's second-highest tropical primary forest loss after Brazil, according to Global Forest Watch. Vincent Vos, a Dutch-Bolivian researcher based in the Amazonian department of Beni, said communities are confronting overlapping crises. 'Santa Cruz has already lost 68% of their water reserves… we've got 30% less rainfall than a decade ago,' he said. 'Our fish is really completely contaminated by mercury already and people are really suffering from high levels of mercury poisoning.' Campaign hasn't centered on environmental issues While environmental issues have not been a central focus of the campaign, both candidates have outlined some proposals. Paz has proposed a $15 billion 'green government' funded by carbon credits, which can be generated from projects like forest-planting that aim to reduce emissions; tighter controls on agricultural burns and a crackdown on illegal gold mining. Quiroga vows to make Bolivia a leader in decarbonization, protect parks, restore fire-hit ecosystems, and expand agriculture 'appropriately' — a stance critics warn could still spur deforestation. Nick Fromherz, a Bolivian-based adjunct professor at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland who specializes in Latin American environmental law, said both candidates have spoken broadly about fighting wildfires and managing the agricultural frontier. But they've offered few solutions to less visible crises like mercury contamination from gold mining, he said. Mercury, widely used in gold mining, flows into rivers and contaminates fish, a dietary staple for Amazonian communities. Studies have found alarmingly high mercury levels in people living along Bolivian rivers, echoing concerns across the Amazon basin. For Stasiek Czaplicki, a Bolivian environmental economist who has studied forest policies, the danger lies not only in policy direction but in the state's ability to enforce protections. He said Quiroga 'would be worst for the institutions that defend the environment.' He cited proposals to end collective Indigenous land titles — opening them to private sales — and to expand soy and cattle production in the east. Critics warn those moves would accelerate deforestation and weaken agencies tasked with curbing it. Local costs, global consequences Fromherz said environmental concerns are still viewed as secondary in Bolivia's politics, even as they shape the lives of millions. For Vos, the gap between rhetoric and reality is measured in disappearing rivers, vanishing fish and poisoned communities. 'People are really suffering,' Vos said. Alipaz says years of unmet commitments have left the Amazon´s communities doubtful that the election will bring significant change. 'What happens to us is that we are stripped of our territory, poisoned with smoke and mercury, and also deprived of the means of life such as water, soil, and food,' Alipaz said. 'The life of Indigenous peoples in Bolivia has gone from bad to worse. We will continue defending. It's not just our lives, it is our very existence that is at stake.' ___ The Associated Press' climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP's standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at
Newsweek
36 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Barack Obama Reacts to Gavin Newsom's Redistricting Play
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Former Democratic President Barack Obama has weighed in on the rare mid-decade redistricting battles unfolding in several states, voicing support for California Gov. Gavin Newsom's cautious approach to revising congressional maps. Obama's comments came as Republican-led efforts in Texas, encouraged by President Donald Trump, aim to strengthen GOP control ahead of next year's elections. "I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach," Obama said Tuesday during a fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. "He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it. We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect." This article includes reporting by the Associated Press.
36 minutes ago
Obama applauds Newsom's California redistricting plan as 'responsible'
Former President Barack Obama has waded into states' efforts at rare mid-decade redistricting efforts, saying he agrees with California Gov. Gavin Newsom's response to alter his state's congressional maps, in the way of Texas redistricting efforts promoted by President Donald Trump aimed at shoring up Republicans' position in next year's elections. 'I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach. He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it,' Obama said at a Tuesday fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. 'We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect.' While noting that 'political gerrymandering' is not his 'preference,' Obama said that, if Democrats 'don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy.' According to organizers, the event raised $2 million for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, one of which has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder, who served as Obama's attorney general and heads up the group, also appeared. The former president's comments come as Texas lawmakers return to Austin this week, renewing a heated debate over a new congressional map creating five new potential GOP seats. The plan is the result of prodding by President Donald Trump, eager to stave off a midterm defeat that would deprive his party of control of the House of Representatives. Texas Democratic lawmakers delayed a vote for 15 days by leaving the state in protest, depriving the House of enough members to do business. Spurred on by the Texas situation, Democratic governors including Newsom have pondered ways to possibly strengthen their party's position by way of redrawing U.S. House district lines, five years out from the Census count that typically leads into such procedures. In California — where voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan — Democrats have unveiled a proposal that could give that state's dominant political party an additional five U.S. House seats in a bid to win the fight to control of Congress next year. If approved by voters in November, the blueprint could nearly erase Republican House members in the nation's most populous state, with Democrats intending to win the party 48 of its 52 U.S. House seats, up from 43. A hearing over that measure devolved into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats, and a committee voted along party lines to advance the new congressional map. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead, and legislators are expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get required voter approval. Newsom and Democratic leaders say they'll ask voters to approve their new maps only for the next few elections, returning map-drawing power to the commission following the 2030 census — and only if a Republican state moves forward with new maps. Obama applauded that temporary timeline. 'And we're going to do it in a temporary basis because we're keeping our eye on where we want to be long term,' Obama said, referencing Newsom's take on the California plan. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.'
