Endgame: Supreme Court Deletes Half Of Oklahoma

"We reaffirm that principle today and hold that the President is neither absolutely immune from state criminal subpoenas seeking his private papers nor entitled to a heightened standard of need." - Justice Roberts

Trump v Vance

Fearmongering in overdrive. For those wondering, Oklahoma is still there.

So why did you provide a link to directive information, but not the Supreme Court ruling in question?

Besides the real news from the Supreme Court today was:


Ah No Duh. -Anyone that paid attention in high school Civics.

Third, courts should be attentive to the nature of the evidence offered
by Congress to establish that a subpoena advances a valid legislative
purpose. The more detailed and substantial, the better. That is particularly true when Congress contemplates legislation that raises sensitive constitutional issues, such as legislation concerning the Presidency.

Well since Order 51 has no place in this conversation, I doubt anyone wants to know what it is. Especially since the only Order that matters is 66.

tl/dr: you cant just say you think the president is commiting a crime, and subpeona his private information. there has to be direct evidence of a crime. its why it had a 7-2 ruling.

All the Supreme Court did today was rule that any major crime committed on Creek Nation lands is a federal crime and must be tried in Federal court. It's no different than the statutes that govern reservations in other states. Oklahoma had just been ignoring the rules, hoping the Creek Nation would just go away. Well they aren't.

Clearly you can. Hence the green light to investigate. Direct evidence of a crime you say?

You mean like the direct evidence provided by Michael Cohen?

All the Supreme Court did today was rule that any major crime committed on Creek Nation lands is a federal crime and must be tried in Federal court. It's no different than the statutes that govern reservations in other states. Oklahoma had just been ignoring the rules, hoping the Creek Nation would just go away. Well they aren't.

This remains what happened. A lot of inmates in Oklahoma are going to have to be retried in Federal court now, but its not like they get to walk free while that happens.

Kinda like this thread has nothing to do with Order 51 yet you posted it anyway?

The Major Crimes Act (MCA) provides that, within “the Indian country,”
“[a]ny Indian who commits” certain enumerated offenses “shall be subject to the same law and penalties as all other persons committing any
of [those] offenses, within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United
States.” 18 U. S. C. §1153(a). “Indian country” includes “all land
within the limits of any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of
the United States Government.” §1151. Petitioner Jimcy McGirt was
convicted by an Oklahoma state court of three serious sexual offenses.
He unsuccessfully argued in state postconviction proceedings that the
State lacked jurisdiction to prosecute him because he is an enrolled
member of the Seminole Nation and his crimes took place on the Creek
Reservation. He seeks a new trial, which, he contends, must take place
in federal court.

For MCA purposes, land reserved for the Creek Nation since the
19th century remains “Indian country.” Pp. 3–42.
(a) Congress established a reservation for the Creek Nation. An
1833 Treaty fixed borders for a “permanent home to the whole Creek
Nation of Indians,” 7 Stat. 418, and promised that the United States
would “grant a patent, in fee simple, to the Creek nation of Indians for
the [assigned] land” to continue “so long as they shall exist as a nation,
and continue to occupy the country hereby assigned to them,” id., at
419. The patent formally issued in 1852.
Though the early treaties did not refer to the Creek lands as a “reservation,” similar language in treaties from the same era has been held
sufficient to create a reservation, see, e.g., Menominee Tribe v. United
States, 391 U. S. 404, 405, and later Acts of Congress—referring to the
“Creek reservation”—leave no room for doubt, see, e.g., 17 Stat. 626.
In addition, an 1856 Treaty promised that “no portion” of Creek lands
“would ever be embraced or included within, or annexed to, any Territory or State,” 11 Stat. 700, and that the Creeks would have the “unrestricted right of self-government,” with “full jurisdiction” over enrolled Tribe members and their property, id., at 704. Pp. 3–6.

Already posted about it.

https://www.ffxiah.com/forum/topic/54265/all-trump-all-the-time/126/#3528897

OP is being disingenuous, that is not what the Supreme Court ruled.



This is about criminal jurisdiction. The Supreme Court did not delete half of Oklahoma, they ruled that a member of the Creek Indian Nation who is suspected of committing a crime on land that Congress promised the Creek peoples is subject to Federal jurisdiction and not Oklahoma jurisdiction.

The law involved is the MCA which makes no mention of taxes, regulations, borders or anything outside of criminal jurisdiction.

The ruling also mentions that as Congress granted the land and created the MCA, Congress must be the ones to resolve any other issues involved.

All the Supreme Court did today was rule that any major crime committed on Creek Nation lands is a federal crime and must be tried in Federal court. It's no different than the statutes that govern reservations in other states. Oklahoma had just been ignoring the rules, hoping the Creek Nation would just go away. Well they aren't.

also bravo supreme court - your potentially letting a three time pedophile walk free because of a technicality. Good job.

thats the part you arent understanding. you are acting as if it only pertains to criminality. it doesnt. by saying this area is still a reservation, it provides legal precedent that it is actually still a reservation (which it is under the current law). this means it is legally not a part of oklahoma. native american reservations are literally not a part of the state that they reside in. they are considered federal territories. this means legally speaking, the only enforcable laws in those areas are federal laws. this means that oklahoma cannot legally enforce anything from a parking ticket, to land ownership there.