I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1995 

To provide a mechanism for a determination on the merits of the claims 

brought by survivors and descendants of the victims of the Tulsa, Oklahoma, Race Riot of 1921 but who were denied that determination. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2007 

Mr. CONYERS (for himself and Mr. NADLER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To provide a mechanism for a determination on the merits 

of the claims brought by survivors and descendants of 

the victims of the Tulsa, Oklahoma, Race Riot of 1921 

but who were denied that determination. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Tulsa-Greenwood Race 

5 Riot Claims Accountability Act of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 The Congress makes the following findings: 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1995 IH

1 (1) In 1921, Greenwood (a community in 

2 Tulsa, Oklahoma) was one of the most prosperous 

3 African American communities in the United States. 

4 Serving over 8,000 residents, Greenwood’s commer5 cial district was known nationally as the ‘‘Negro 

6 Wall Street’’. The community boasted two news7 papers, over a dozen churches, and hundreds of Afri8 can American-owned businesses. 

9 (2) On the evening of May 31, 1921, the Afri10 can American Greenwood community of Tulsa, Okla11 homa, was ravaged by a white mob. By the conclu12 sion of the riot at midday, June 1, virtually every 

13 building in a 42-square-block area of the commu14 nity—homes, schools, churches, and businesses—was 

15 burned to the ground and thousands were left home16 less. Over 1,200 homes were destroyed. Every 

17 church, school, and business in Greenwood was set 

18 on fire. Approximately 8,000 African Americans 

19 were left homeless and penniless. Unable to rebuild, 

20 thousands of residents spent the winter of 1921- 

21 1922 in tents. 

22 (3) Credible evidence supports the belief that 

23 up to 300 African Americans were killed during the 

24 riot. As many victims were buried in unmarked 

25 graves, an exact accounting is impossible. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•HR 1995 IH

1 (4) In the wake of the white mob destruction of 

2 the Greenwood District, a State-convened grand jury 

3 officially placed responsibility for the violence on the 

4 African-American community, exonerating whites of 

5 all responsibility. Neither the State nor the city un6 dertook any investigations or prosecutions, and doc7 uments relating to the riot vanished from State ar8 chives. Ultimately, no convictions were obtained for 

9 the incidents of murder, arson, or larceny connected 

10 with the riot. 

11 (5) None of the more than 100 contempora12 neously filed lawsuits by residents and property own13 ers in Greenwood were successful in recovering dam14 ages from insurance companies to assist in the re15 construction of the community. After the city at16 tempted to block their redevelopment efforts, victims 

17 were forced to rebuild with their own resources or 

18 abandon the community. 

19 (6) State and local governments suppressed or 

20 ignored issues and claims arising from the 1921 riot, 

21 effectively excising it from collective memory, until 

22 the Oklahoma Legislature created a commission to 

23 study the event in 1997. The commission’s February 

24 28, 2001, report uncovered new information and de25 tailed, for the first time, the extent of involvement 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
4 

•HR 1995 IH

1 by the State and city government in prosecuting and 

2 erasing evidence of the riot (Okla. Stat. Tit. 74 Sec3 tion 8000.1 (West 2005)). 

4 (7) The documentation assembled by The 1921 

5 Tulsa Race Riot Commission provides strong evi6 dence that some local municipal and county officials 

7 failed to take actions to calm or contain the situa8 tion once violence erupted and, in some cases, be9 came participants in the subsequent violence, and 

10 even deputized and armed many Whites who were 

11 part of a mob that killed, looted, and burned down 

12 the Greenwood area. 

13 (8) Based on new information contained in the 

14 report, the Greenwood claimants filed suit, pursuant 

15 to the laws codifed in sections 1981, 1983, and 1985 

16 of title 42 of the United States Code and the 14th 

17 amendment, seeking damages for the injuries sus18 tained in the riot as a result of the government’s in19 volvement. Their claims were dismissed as time 

20 barred by the court, and so were not determined on 

21 the merits. 382 F.3d 1206 (10th Cir. 2004), rehrg 

22 en banc denied (with dissent), 391 F. 3d 1155 (10th 

23 Cir. 2004), cert denied Alexander v. State of Okla24 homa, 544 U.S. 1044 (2005). 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
5 

•HR 1995 IH

1 SEC. 3. DETERMINATION ON MERITS FOR GREENWOOD 

2 CLAIMANTS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Any Greenwood claimant who has 

4 not previously obtained a determination on the merits of 

5 a Greenwood claim may, in a civil action commenced not 

6 later than 5 years after the date of the enactment of this 

7 Act, obtain that determination. 

8 (b) INTENT OF CONGRESS AS TO REMEDIAL NATURE

9 OF SECTION.—It is the intent of Congress that this sec10 tion be liberally construed so as to effectuate its remedial 

11 purpose of giving a full determination on the merits for 

12 each Greenwood claim denied that determination. 

13 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act— 

14 (1) the term ‘‘Greenwood claimant’’ means an 

15 individual who filed a discrimination complaint aris16 ing from conduct connected to the May 31, 1921, 

17 race riot in Tulsa, Oklahoma; and 

18 (2) the term ‘‘Greenwood claim’’ means a com19 plaint filed in the Alexander v. State of Oklahoma 

20 litigation that was dismissed as time barred by the 

21 Federal court. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS