I cannot even begin to explain the impact this has on the Oklahoma oil and gas industry, and to its leases https://twitter.com/casteelpolitics/status/1281230137946759169

and I quote "(a) Congress established a reservation for the Creek Nation. An 1833 Treaty fixed borders for a “permanent home to the whole CreekNation of Indians,” 7 Stat. 418, and promised that the United States would “grant a patent, in fee simple, to the Creek Nation of Indians

for the [assigned] land” to continue “so long as they shall exist as a nation, and continue to occupy the country hereby assigned to them,” id., at
419. The patent formally issued in 1852."

https://www.okhistory.org/research/restriction

The @okhistory did a great job here, identifying Restricted vs. Unrestricted Indian rights. As such, it will be interesting to see if title attorneys and landmen properly accounted for these restrictions in making their title determinations.

https://www.okhistory.org/research/restriction

Another consideration regarding Oklahoma Titles is the Oklahoma Marketable Record Title act. Many landmen misapply this rule. The act only applies to Fee Simple title (i.e. unsevered minerals) and does not apply to severed minerals. It effectively states...

that if someone without a clear source deed is claiming title to a property, the title becomes marketable in the claimant's name. In order for this to happen, it requires no adverse claims against title during those 30 consecutive years.

http://eppersonlaw.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/294-MRTA-and-Cotenancy-draft14-05-29-16-revised-and-re-submitted-to-OBJ.pdf

It does appear to expose some of the bigger private equity players in the Arkoma Basin. @AntiochEnergy, @CorterraEnergy, Bravo Arkoma, 89 Energy, Trinity Operating, etc.

Should @Tesla actually be negotiating with the Seminole (Creek) Nation for their potential plant in Tulsa, OK?

While the @SCOTUSblog opinion appears to be narrow in scope, "Today we are asked whether the land these treaties promised remains an Indian reservation for the purposes of federal criminal law", the same facts could be applied to jurisdictional issues...

For example, does the @PUDOCC have jurisdiction to preside over the orderly development of oil and gas - think Forced Pooling? While this ruling doesn't directly affect things, I anticipate new suits to follow challenging these things.

In reading the opinion of SCOTUS, I came across a concerning nugget, "The US will cause a patent or grant to be made and executed to them for the same; provided always, that such lands shall revert to the US if the Indians become extinct, or abandon the same."

Much of the chatter right now, even from news outlets, is that Gov Stitt is negotiating with the Tribes. Even if they come to an agreement on whatever it is they are negotiating will it even hold, given this language?

I hope everyone has enjoyed watching me walk back my original statement that this impacts oil and gas (it does not directly). I do, however, anticipate many challenges to emulate from this ruling.