Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-9526_9okb.pdf
Page Number: 46

Cite as:  591 U. S. ____ (2020) 

1 

ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 18–9526 
_________________ 

JIMCY MCGIRT, PETITIONER v. OKLAHOMA 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL 
APPEALS OF OKLAHOMA 

[July 9, 2020]

 CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, with whom JUSTICE ALITO and 
join,  and  with  whom  JUSTICE 

JUSTICE  KAVANAUGH 
THOMAS joins except as to footnote 9, dissenting. 

In  1997,  the  State  of  Oklahoma  convicted  petitioner 
Jimcy McGirt of molesting, raping, and forcibly sodomizing 
a four-year-old girl, his wife’s granddaughter.  McGirt was 
sentenced  to  1,000  years  plus  life  in  prison.  Today,  the
Court holds that Oklahoma lacked jurisdiction to prosecute 
McGirt—on  the  improbable  ground  that,  unbeknownst  to 
anyone for the past century, a huge swathe of Oklahoma is 
actually  a  Creek  Indian  reservation,  on  which  the  State
may not prosecute serious crimes committed by Indians like 
McGirt.  Not only does the Court discover a Creek reserva-
tion that spans three million acres and includes most of the 
city of Tulsa, but the Court’s reasoning portends that there
are four more such reservations in Oklahoma.  The redis-
covered reservations encompass the entire eastern half of
the State—19 million acres that are home to 1.8 million peo-
ple, only 10%–15% of whom are Indians. 

Across this vast area, the State’s ability to prosecute se-
rious crimes will be hobbled and decades of past convictions
could well be thrown out.  On top of that, the Court has pro-
foundly destabilized the governance of eastern Oklahoma. 
The  decision  today  creates  significant  uncertainty  for  the 
State’s continuing authority over any area that touches In-
dian affairs, ranging from zoning and taxation to family and