Why collective annotation?
McGirt v. Oklahoma is a significant legal decision for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation, but also for tribes all over Indian Country. By critically reading and engaging with the opinion and dissent(s) issued by the Supreme Court, scholars, teachers, students, and community members can examine the ways in which Native people have fought for sovereignty and treaty rights, and take an in-depth look into how Native American history has been shaped by the courts and Congressional policy.
This site was designed with community-building and collaboration in mind. By reading this decision (critical in both historical context and contemporary society and law) together, we can share thoughts, opinions, reactions, and ideas for further steps we can take to promote knowledge and awareness of Native peoples’ rights in the United States today.
By contributing to our collective annotations, you are adding your voice and ideas to those of contributors across the nation. You also get to respond directly to the words of the Supreme Court justices who authored the opinion and dissents.
We look forward to see what kinds of discussions emerge in the margins of this important legal decision!
A note on public annotations:
Photo: Brandi Redd via UnSplash
This site uses the open platform, Hypothes.is, for collaborative annotation and discussion. Users are expected to abide by the Hypothesis Community Guidelines at all times. By posting to the Public channel, annotations can be seen by anybody who visits this website.
If you have questions about privacy and annotations, please see this guide from Hypothesis: Who can see my annotations?