Under the Major Crimes Act, Indian tribes have concurrent jurisdiction in their reservation territories for criminal justice purposes when Indians are involved in an offense. The land granted to the Creek Nation in Oklahoma was never formally disestablished by Congress, and so tribal member Jimcy McGirt asserted that a crime for which Oklahoma convicted him was tried under the wrong sovereign.

Is Oklahoma the correct sovereign for a crime committed in eastern Oklahoma? Troy Eid of Greenberg Traurig LLP discusses criminal jurisdiction and Indian territory in McGirt v. Oklahoma.


As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues. All opinions expressed are those of the speaker.

Learn more about Troy Eid:



Related Links & Differing Views:

SCOTUSblog: “Opinion analysis: Justices toe hard line in affirming reservation status from eastern Oklahoma”

UCLA Law Review: “Recentering Tribal Criminal Jurisdiction”

The National Law Review: “Review of McGirt v. Oklahoma

Slate: “What’s Behind Neil Gorsuch’s Stunning Win for Indigenous People”

The Federalist Society: “Courthouse Steps Decision: McGirt v. Oklahoma