The Muscogee Nation Citizenship Board filed its first monthly status report with the Muscogee Nation Supreme Court on Dec. 5, which outlines how the board is attempting to implement the court’s order to admit Freedmen descendants as citizens. The filing references a proposal to require descendants to prove lineal descent from individuals listed on the Dunn Roll, a document finalized in 1869. However, many attempted changes rely on code amendments from the Muscogee National Council, which has yet to indicate plans to consider those adjustments.
After attorneys representing Muscogee Freedmen descendants Rhonda Grayson and Jeffrey Kennedy motioned the Muscogee Nation Supreme Court to hold the nation in contempt for failing to implement the court’s controversial July order to admit Freedmen descendants as citizens, the court ordered the Muscogee Nation government to provide monthly status reports on its efforts to implement the court’s decision.
Under Principal Chief David Hill’s August executive order instructing the Muscogee Nation’s executive branch to prepare to implement the court’s decision, the citizenship board was prohibited from issuing citizenship cards to Freedmen until the executive and legislative branches complete their work. In practice, the executive order prevented any Freedmen from registering to vote in the Muscogee Nation’s 2025 general election.
In its Nov. 13 order, the tribe’s high court ordered Hill’s administration to provide the court with “all areas in which the [Muscogee Nation Citizenship Board] believes amendments to the nation’s code, internal policies and procedures, or any other area (are) required.” The order made clear the court expected a comprehensive list of necessary changes, saying “failure” would be taken into consideration as to the plaintiffs’ motion for contempt.
Hill’s administration was ordered to provide the court with “a summary explanation” for each of the following by Dec. 5, when then first status report was due:
- “each ‘necessary amendment’ to ‘policies and procedures’ that has been submitted by any MCN department” in response to Hill’s executive order, as well as what actions have been taken on each amendment;
- “each ‘proposed code amendment’ submitted by the attorney general’s office;”
- “each proposed amendment to ‘the citizenship board’s policies and procedures;'”
- “all actions taken to date by the citizenship board to promulgate administrative rules facilitating” the court’s July order;
- “all anticipated ‘questions of national significance to be answered by the elected officials of the nation;'”
- “all additional questions that must be addressed before the citizenship board” before citizenship documents are issued; and
- “a summary explanation detailing what [the citizenship board] asserts is a reasonable timeframe for completing all necessary steps prior to issuing citizenship documentation.”
Attorney Damario Solomon-Simmons praised the court’s requirement of status reports in a Dec. 3 press release.
“For the first time, they must document exactly what they have — or have not — done to restore our citizenship,” Solomon-Simmons said. “This is not full relief. But it is oversight. And it is a public record they cannot hide from.”
Hill pens letter, National Council ignores court
In its first monthly status report, the Muscogee Nation Citizenship Board’s attorneys attempted to respond to each of the court’s questions, while noting most of the process is outside of the board’s direct control. Much of the report referenced attached exhibits that provided details on how the Muscogee Nation was working to implement the decision.
For instance, the proposed Title 7 amendments provided by the board would make several additions to allow for Muscogee Freedmen citizenship, while also not removing every reference of the phrase “by blood” from the code — a controversial requirement in the Supreme Court’s July ruling.
RELATED
As Freedmen file for contempt over delays, Muscogee citizenship board touts ‘necessary steps’ by Tristan Loveless
In order to be eligible for citizenship as a Muscogee Freedmen under the proposed amendments, enrollees would need to prove they are descended both from someone listed “on the final Freedmen rolls provided by the Act of April 26, 1906” and from someone who was eligible for citizenship under the Treaty of 1866. The proposal says someone can prove they are descended from an individual eligible for citizenship under the Treaty of 1866 by proving lineal descent from an individual listed on the Dunn Roll, which actually consisted of two rolls — an 1867 Muscogee Freedmen census and a receipt roll of Freedmen who received a payment in 1869.Â
As to the question of timeframe for enrolling Freedmen under such a requirement, the board indicated it would take 60 to 90 days from the passage of the proposed Title 7 amendments to complete its rulemaking process. The filing’s final exhibit represented a copy of the board’s current proposed changes to its procedures to be considered after Title 7 is amended.
Despite the filing to the tribe’s Supreme Court, the Muscogee National Council does not have any amendments related to Title 7 included on its December agendas as of the publication of this article.
The first exhibit in the board’s status report is a letter addressed to Hill requesting information responsive to the court’s questions. The second was Hill’s response.
“As a general matter, I, as principal chief, do not want to be uncooperative and do not want to impede the ability of the board to provide an appropriate response to the court as the board sees fit,” Hill wrote. “However, I am not a party in the Grayson case, and, as a matter of separation of powers, information about the implementation of the constitutional duties and responsibilities of the executive branch departments and officials, including communications with the National Council on proposed legislation, falls under the exclusive province of the principal chief and is not generally subject to disclosure except as required by nation law.”
Despite the light objection, Hill did state that executive departments continue to work on amendments, but the process would not be complete until the National Council votes to update the nation’s code. Hill also said he has discussed scheduling a committee meeting to consider amendments to Title 7, the code which governs citizenship. Hill said he has broached the topic with Speaker Randall Hicks, but he noted the National Council is ultimately in charge of its own schedule.
The board’s Dec. 5 filing also included a letter it sent to Hicks requesting information, which went unanswered.
Read the Muscogee Nation Citizenship Board’s first status report
