No, the Supreme Court Didn't Just Break Oklahoma in Two
The Supreme Court announced its decision in the case of McGirt v. Oklahoma early Thursday, and several news outlets immediately came out with the most sensationalist headlines they could find. Even influential news organizations extended the impact of the ruling far beyond the borders of the actual case, proclaiming that the state of Oklahoma had been cut in two.
It's true that McGirt will potentially have massive ramifications for Native American rights in eastern Oklahoma. It will undoubtedly raise tough issues like the question of reparations for Indigenous peoples. But it goes too far to suggest that the Supreme Court just unilaterally reestablished full tribal sovereignty over vast parts of the 46th state. Here's why.
Image source: Getty Images.
Source Fool.com
