The Muscogee Nation’s Court made history. They were holding that the tribe’s citizenship board breached a treaty from 1866 by denying their applications to enroll from Rhonda Grayson and her sister, Kennedy. Not surprisingly, the court issued a unanimous opinion. Today, the citizenship board should face a reckoning as they review applications from the descendants of Creek Freedmen, who were formerly enslaved by the tribe.
The citizenship board had denied Grayson and Kennedy’s applications in 2019 for lack of lineage, claiming there was not a direct line to their ancestors. Their dismissal stemmed from the Muscogee Nation’s 1979 constitution. This constitution restricts Section 1 membership to people who can prove their lineage to people designated as such on the Dawes Rolls. The court found that this restriction conflicted with the rights guaranteed under the 1866 treaty, which addressed the status of people of African descent living among southeastern Indigenous nations, including the Muscogee Nation.
To be clear, the Muscogee Nation and these other tribes historically enslaved Black people. This unjust practice persisted until the signing of the 1866 treaty. This compromise was that those enslaved would be given the rights of citizenship. Freedmen groups have been constantly fighting to gain their proper enrollment and recognition within the tribe. This fight has continued for decades.
The court’s ruling does reveal a glaring inconsistency in tribal citizenship laws. The Cherokee Nation and the Seminole Nation have a shared practice of granting citizenship to individuals enslaved by their respective tribes. By contrast, the Muscogee Nation has consistently denied these claims. The Seminole Nation has extended citizenship to the Freedmen, though some complications have persisted regarding their status.
“The families later known as Creek Freedmen likewise walked the Trail of Tears alongside the tribal clans and fought to protect the new homeland upon arrival in Indian Territory,” stated Denette Mouser, emphasizing the historical ties and sacrifices made by these families.
The court’s ruling acknowledges the painful history of Freedmen’s oppression. In so doing, it provokes a broader discussion about modes of healing and reconciliation required in the community. Rhonda Grayson expressed hope for a more inclusive future: “While this victory honors our past, it offers a meaningful opportunity for healing and reconciliation.”
The Dawes Rolls were issued during the last decade of the 19th century. They are especially important for tracking people from the Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee (Creek) and Seminole nations. Grayson and Kennedy’s ancestors likely would have appeared on the Freedmen Roll. However, they are not on the original Muscogee Roll, which poses an incredible challenge to their claims to citizenship.
In their ruling, the Muscogee Nation Court stated, “Are we, as a Nation, bound to treaty promises made so many years ago? Today, we answer in the affirmative, because this is what Mvskoke law demands.” These words profess a deep commitment for respecting past promises. It further underscores the need to affirm the rights of all those who make up the tribe.
Indeed, this ruling represents a significant victory for the Creek Freedmen’s descendants. It guarantees that they are treated fairly and justly by their own tribal government. Freedmen advocacy groups are mobilizing and organizing throughout the five southeastern tribes. They continue to fight for their members to finally receive the recognition and citizenship they’re owed.
Grayson, who is a founding director of the Oklahoma Indian Territory Museum of Black Creek Freedmen History. Today, this museum is a powerful reminder of the ongoing fight for remembrance and justice. The museum uses this educational opportunity to teach about the history of Black Creek Freedmen. It protects their enormous contributions to the U.S. Muscogee Nation as seen today.