The flag of the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians. Photo courtesy UKB
Oklahoma on the Fictional and Misleading Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma “Chief Chat” Published October 18, 2024, by CNO Chief Chuck
Hoskin Jr.
It is important that we address the recent “Chief Chat” from Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr.
The statements in this article are not based in fact, are not the truth and attempt to create
a fictional narrative in hopes of creating division between Cherokees.
The article serves a political agenda, benefiting the leadership of the CNO and ignoring
the reality that our tribal members live and work together, and share a rich history. The
imaginary and inflammatory narrative pushed in this piece attempts to rewrite history and
facts to erode the UKB’s rightful standing as a federally recognized tribe and a successor
in interest to the Cherokee treaties.
It’s disappointing that the CNO leadership would rather attempt to create division than
work towards unity. The UKB stands for truth and a future where both the UKB and CNO
work together with mutual respect. We cannot allow inaccurate and misleading
statements to continue unchecked, nor can we accept the erasure of our history.
While we categorically disagree with the premise, spirit and specifics of Hoskin’s “ChiefChat,” we are compelled to correct the record and directly dispel the many outlandish
claims in his writing.
Hoskin’s Claim: “Cherokee Nation existed before the founding of the United States. For
every “Cherokee” treaty with the United States, the Cherokee Nation was the exclusive
tribal nation involved.”
False. As Chief Hoskin well knows but fears to admit, the historic Cherokee Nation
today is represented equally by three federally recognized Cherokee tribes (United
Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, Eastern Band of Cherokee
Indians (located in North Carolina), and the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma (which
now, unhelpfully and undoubtedly to sow confusion, calls itself the Cherokee
Nation).
Plus, the history of Cherokee treaties is much richer than the CNO Chief fails to ever
mention, mostly because it does not support his self-serving “version” of history.
For instance, there was a faction of Cherokees that voluntarily moved west prior to
the trail of tears, comprising the fullbloods who were known as the Western
Cherokee, predecessors to what became the United Keetoowah Band. The treaty of
New Echota (the removal treaty) was signed by a group of Cherokee that lacked
authority to negotiate a treaty on behalf of the whole of the Cherokee people. The
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma routinely overlooks the historical defects caused by
one faction of the Cherokee who held themselves out as acting with authority on
behalf of the whole of the Cherokee people. Chief Hoskin repeats this sin daily, as
evidenced by his October 18 statements and comments since.
Hoskin’s Claim: “All of our treaty rights – including our final and binding Treaty of 1866 –
as well as every other inherent, judicially, or congressionally recognized attribute of
“Cherokee Nation” sovereignty belongs solely to the Cherokee Nation.”
False. As noted above and as Chief Hoskin is aware, there are three federally
recognized Cherokee Tribes: The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, the United
Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, and the Cherokee Nation of
Oklahoma. Cherokees who removed to Indian Territory at the time of the treaty of
New Echota outnumbered the traditional Western Cherokee, who were already in
present day Oklahoma by a ratio of four to one. The majority enacted the Cherokee
Act of Union which consolidated the governments of the Western Cherokee and the
removed Cherokee but by 1846 the federal government soon realized that a new
treaty was necessary, and that treaty expressly recognized the rights of both the
Western Cherokee and the removed Cherokee to ownership of the Cherokee Indian
Reservation. Hoskin picks and chooses his historical facts, and he often does so
unchallenged. He counts on CNO’s money and power to keep people from asking
questions, the UKB counts on the historical facts alone.
Hoskin’s Claim: “Two bands were recognized after Cherokee removal – and after our
hard-fought and enduring path to unity. ”
History cherrypicked by Chief Hoskin proves him wrong, again. For the 1785 and
1791 Cherokee treaties, the whole of the Cherokee people was one body politic. The
traditional fullblood Cherokees that would become the Western Cherokee, the
precursor to the United Keetoowah Band, signed a treaty in 1817 independent of the
larger Cherokee body politic. At the time of the 1835 Cherokee treaty purportedly
signed on behalf of the whole of the Cherokee people, the Western Cherokee were
identifiable for their adherence to traditional Cherokee beliefs and practices, but
were an integral part of the Cherokee body politic. The 1846 treaty recognized the
ownership rights of both the Western Cherokees and the removed Cherokees in the
Oklahoma Cherokee reservation.
Further, during the Civil War the removed Cherokees (mixed blood Indians from
whom the CNO descends) sided with the Confederacy, in favor of slavery, and
executed a treaty with the Confederacy to confirm their loyalty to the Confederacy.
The traditional Western Cherokee, on the other hand, sided with President Lincoln,
opposed slavery and enlisted and fought in the Union Army to protect the Union. At
the end of the Civil War, the mixed blood majority, not including the Keetoowah, of
course, executed the 1866 treaty on behalf of the whole of the Cherokee people to
reestablish the government-to-government relationship with the surviving Union. In
contrast, the Union presented to the Keetoowah a battle flag to express its gratitude
for the Keetoowah’s loyalty to the Union and its opposition to slavery. The flag is
proudly displayed today in the United Keetoowah Band’s museum in Tahlequah.
The bottom line is that pre-statehood Oklahoma Cherokee government exists today
in Oklahoma in both the Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma and the United Keetoowah
Band. The CNO bully tactics cannot be allowed to rewrite history.
Hoskin’s Claims: “Neither band has any jurisdictional authority over the Cherokee
Nation Reservation” , “…ill-defined administrative authority the UKB exercises at its
government complex” and “Notably, UKB lacks any criminal jurisdiction over the 7,000-
square-mile Cherokee Nation Reservation. None.”
There is no evidence to prove this outlandish claim saying the UKB lacks jurisdiction
other than things that CNO has created themselves saying so. Further, the UKB has
76-acres of land in trust with the United States over which it unambiguously
exercises jurisdiction. Chief Hoskin’s lack of understanding of the law aside, there is
nothing ambiguous about the UKB’s authority. There is nothing saying the UKB lacks
criminal jurisdiction other than CNO saying so.
Hoskin’s Claims: “Recently, a person passing through Tahlequah, and alleged to be
driving under the influence, was arrested and charged with a DUI” , “The employee of
UKB, like all UKB Lighthorse “Police” staff, lacked the legal authority to pull over vehicles,
much less detain anyone, which she did” , and “The sole reason for this is that the UKB,
posing as a police force, ruined a prosecution of an alleged drunk driver.”
The UKB officer referred the matter to a state officer, who arrested the individual,
following procedure. The matter has not been fully litigated but federal case law
affirms that the UKB officer’s actions were proper. Furthermore, UKB officers would
have authority as CLEET certified officers under Oklahoma law and US v. Cooley
allows for tribal officers to detain non-Indians without cross deputation agreements.
Further, the Bureau of Indian Affairs has issued law enforcement commissions to
UKB law enforcement officers to enforce federal and tribal law. Agreements with
local law enforcement would also be in place but for Chief Hoskin’s practice of
directing local law enforcement to withhold cooperation with the UKB, a shameful
practice by Hoskin that compromises the safety of Oklahomans.
Statement by Assistant Chief Jeff Wacoche: UKB Law Enforcement Jurisdiction
Hoskin’s Claims: “…twisted priorities of the UKB leadership”, “It means people can get
hurt, lives can be lost, and justice cannot be served”, and “The UKB, with its frivolous
claims to our treaty rights, is an existential threat to the Cherokee Nation.”
The sick priorities of the CNO leadership are to terminate the UKB. The UKB’s goal is
to protect the health, safety, and welfare of all citizens living within the Oklahoma
Cherokee Reservation, even as the CNO fights to ensure its monopolistic empire,
and nothing more.
The UKB has attempted for the two tribes to work together and show mutual respect
for each other. Among the Oklahoma Cherokee people, there is no such division. It
is only the leadership of the CNO who promote division. The Cherokee people in
Oklahoma live together in the community, share homes and attend the same
schools. We are family.
Chief Hoskin’s dangerous and reckless comments regarding a bona fide law
enforcement agency on the Oklahoma Cherokee Reservation, and legitimate
actions by a law enforcement officer, constitutes the real to public safety in
Northeastern Oklahoma.
The UKB is not a threat to the historic Cherokee Nation. In fact, we are the
embodiment of the historic Cherokee Nation. Nor is the UKB a threat, existential or
otherwise, to the CNO. Perhaps the CNO leadership should ask the people if they
feel threatened by their traditional brothers and sisters at UKB.
We encourage everyone to dig into Cherokee history. Do not let the CNO spoon feed
a selective version of history. Visit the UKB museum. Talk to your elders.
Chief Hoskin’s efforts to pit Cherokee against Cherokee is despicable. It is beyond
the time to move forward together and to heal as the Cherokee people.
