Oklahomans, what just happened?

[olstyn]

Another interesting question is going to be ccw, since afiak it’s illegal for non Indians to carry on Indian land.

I presume this is based on the idea that tribes = sovereign nations? If so, do no state or federal laws apply inside tribal borders?

[Arbninftry]

Now we are bordering on another thread. If Groups No Longer Recognize the Legitimacy of the Law...

Yes, this will/can get fuzzy quick. All I know, is my CHL is recognized in so many states, and as long as I don't walk into a building that has a No guns sign, I don't think anyone should worry about it. Because you can always argue, it was all Indian land at one time or another, but now we are the United States, from sea to shining sea.

I still remember AIM before it was in a movie or two. But that was mainly up north in the Dakotas. Down here you would see them at tribal gatherings. But I also remember seeing the Randy Weaver selling his book at the big Tulsa gun show when I was a kid.

There will always be those that have their own agenda. The things that bring us together as a nation are being blurred. Is this all a coincidence?

[Caballoflaco]

I presume this is based on the idea that tribes = sovereign nations? If so, do no state or federal laws apply inside tribal borders?

Yes. My understanding is state laws do not apply to tribal land, that’s why casinos are a thing. I’m not sure what federal laws apply because my research on the matter was planning some future rides out west, but since states issue ccw permits the general consensus of my Internet research was that there were no Indian lands that honored state issued ccw.

ETA: there are some Tribes that do allow carry with a state license. This website gives a general overview of tribes who have a written policy. As noted though it may be out of date.

https://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/tribal_law_ccw.pdf

ETA: and the Muscogee creek do recognize state permits according to the link.

It shall be unlawful for any person to carry and conceal on or about his person any firearm, pistol, rifle or other deadly weapon whether loaded or unloaded. Provided, that this section will not be applicable to law enforcement officers and security guards duly authorized or certified to carry arms or persons issued a valid Concealed Weapons Permit or licensed by another Indian Tribe, state or the federal government in accordance with the provisions of MCNCA Title 16, § 4–114. Provided, nothing in this section shall authorize a carrier of a Concealed Weapons Permit or license to carry weapons into gaming establishments, said authorization which is governed by MCNCA Title

[Joe S]

Another interesting question is going to be ccw, since afiak it’s illegal for non Indians to carry on Indian land.

My silly non-lawyer brain would think that made it de facto legal, since state laws don't apply, and federal doesn't mention it, unless tribal law specifically mentions it.

[ST911]

Another interesting question is going to be ccw, since afiak it’s illegal for non Indians to carry on Indian land.

I presume this is based on the idea that tribes = sovereign nations? If so, do no state or federal laws apply inside tribal borders?

Yes. My understanding is state laws do not apply to tribal land, that’s why casinos are a thing. I’m not sure what federal laws apply because my research on the matter was planning some future rides out west, but since states issue ccw permits the general consensus of my Internet research was that there were no Indian lands that honored state issued ccw.

Some of this was referenced indirectly via statute and discussion earlier, but the nutshell topical to CCW- Tribes don't have criminal jurisdiction over non-indians. Some tribal and regulatory provisions may not even apply to indians who aren't members of that tribe. State law coexists for non-indians in indian country. A tribe can bar people from its lands, and that would be the most likely enforcement mechanism were one to be applied. Therefore, if you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the tribe, and no applicable federal codes exist governing your act, state law prevails.

Subdivisions of state government (cities, counties, townships, special regulatory districts) also overlap tribal territories in many places and operate according to state law when jurisdiction applies.

A tribal officer who is cross credentialed to enforce state or overlapping county or municipal codes can apply law by circumstance, but only to whoever is subject to its jurisdiction.

The whole "sovereign nation" thing isn't the thing people think it is.

[Half Moon]

I presume this is based on the idea that tribes = sovereign nations? If so, do no state or federal laws apply inside tribal borders?

It gets complicated. Federal always applies (except sometimes congress has exempted the tribes explicitly from federal legislation, for instance the ADA). While they are recognized as sovereign nations, under case law going way back, the tribes are also considered wards of the federal government (which is why certain contracts for instance require approval by one federal entity or another). They must comply with federal law and the feds have enforcement power on tribal land. As a generality , states have no jurisdiction on tribal lands ( except where they do, for instance - some gaming compacts, on a tribe by tribe basis, have ceded certain jurisdiction to a given state). Essentially think of it as visiting another state with its own laws, etc.

Edited to add: and to go with what ST1911 said above: some tribes have worked deals for instance with the neighboring Sheriff's office to cross-commission Tribal Police as reserve deputies to give them enforcement power over non- tribal members. Circumstances vary tribe by tribe.

[Chuck Whitlock]

Some of this was referenced indirectly via statute and discussion earlier, but the nutshell topical to CCW- Tribes don't have criminal jurisdiction over non-indians. Some tribal and regulatory provisions may not even apply to indians who aren't members of that tribe. State law coexists for non-indians in indian country. A tribe can bar people from its lands, and that would be the most likely enforcement mechanism were one to be applied. Therefore, if you are not subject to the jurisdiction of the tribe, and no applicable federal codes exist governing your act, state law prevails.

Subdivisions of state government (cities, counties, townships, special regulatory districts) also overlap tribal territories in many places and operate according to state law when jurisdiction applies.

A tribal officer who is cross credentialed to enforce state or overlapping county or municipal codes can apply law by circumstance, but only to whoever is subject to its jurisdiction.

The whole "sovereign nation" thing isn't the thing people think it is.

Quoted for truth.

Edited to add: and to go with what ST1911 said above: some tribes have worked deals for instance with the neighboring Sheriff's office to cross-commission Tribal Police as reserve deputies to give them enforcement power over non- tribal members. Circumstances vary tribe by tribe.

And state-by-state. I was cross-commissioned with the State of Nebraska. In NE, entities that are not the State, or political subdivisions thereof, could not commission LE. My commission was as a Special State Deputy Sheriff, and administered through the NSP. This was also the mechanism for University of Nebraska police officers, cattle rangers, etc.

[Caballoflaco]

The Legal Brief did a YouTube video on the ccw topic I just found. His run down is basically what some more research on my part, including asking a Tribal Officer on another non gun forum I’m a member of. He also brought up that yeah, depending on who your dealing with they could possibly confiscate your guns and detain you and take their time, maybe a day or more, verifying if you’re a member of the tribe or not. (That was a worst case scenario)

[Warped Mindless]

Don't make blanket judgments.

(BTW, I agree that Native Americans were treated horribly and treaties weren't honored. But if we're going back, every group stole the land (they later occupied) from some other group. Native Americans displaced other tribes regularly, Native African tribes did the same. I don't know who was here when the Asians crossed the land bridge to North America...but you can be sure someone wasn't happy about the new neighbors. And so it goes.)

Let me preface this by saying im half Native American.

You are 100% correct.

Many people seem to believe that NA tribes were a bunch of hippes who lived in harmony with nature and all loved one another. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[Borderland]

For many years, I worked as a prosecutor in Fremont County, WY. Our county includes the Wind River Indian Reservation. The fundamental question of whether a reservation has been "diminished" turns on many factors - legal and factual. The consequences of this determination are enormous and go far beyond criminal jurisdiction. Tribes have
some civil, regulatory, and taxation powers over non-Indians in "Indian country". Think about that.

Here is a case I prosecuted in which the defendant claimed Riverton, WY to be "Indian country": https://law.justia.com/cases/wyoming...08/451186.html.

Congress would do well to sort this out as the Tribe now holds a winning hand.

I'm not holding out a lot of hope that congress will do much of anything. There are some other very serious problems that congress should have dealt with by now but haven't. There is just too much partisan divide these days to come to an agreement on anything. When there is major legislation coming from the house and the senate won't even vote on it for fear it might pass, you know you're in deep kimchi.

Might be that non-Native Americans in OK might all be in the YOYO tribe now.

Added. I just read that link. It's loaded with information about treaties and how some tribes "renegotiated" away some treaty land. I'm not sure exactly how this plays out regarding the recent SC decision. Seems the tribes may still have some rights to those lands.