The Far End of the Trail: Over 200 Years of Muscogee (Creek) Sovereignty in Federal Indian Law

Through an analysis of relevant Supreme Court decisions and congressional legislation using the framework of settler colonial studies, this thesis argues that federal settler colonial policies and inconsistently applied case law enabled Muscogee (Creek) lands to be opened for non-Native settlement. When these lands were later affirmed as reservation territory in McGirt v. Oklahoma, the decision exposed inaccurate public understanding of Federal Indian Law, shaped by the legacy of the Marshall Trilogy and Oklahoma’s encroachment during the Allotment Era. By examining the development of Federal Indian Law in relation to the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, this thesis demonstrates how settler colonial policies have influenced both law and public memory, creating inconsistencies in the interpretation of Tribal sovereignty. It asks: How have the U.S. Supreme Court majority opinions in McGirt v. Oklahoma and Oklahoma v. Castro-Huerta addressed historical inconsistencies in Federal Indian Law?