You have commented 358 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Great Cultural Revolution
Oklahoma Supreme Court Rejects Reparations Claim for Tulsa Race Massacre
2024-06-13
[LI] The court rejected the "new ’unlimited and unprincipled’ form of liability" siding with the massacre victims would have created.

The Oklahoma Supreme Court today rejected a reparations claim from survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre.
…over a century ago. How many survivors still live?
The plaintiffs made two claims: public nuisance and unjust enrichment.

The high court affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of the claims, which resulted in this appeal, as Legal Insurrection reported.

The plaintiffs’ public nuisance claim alleged they "continue[d] to face racially disparate treatment and City-created barriers to basic human needs" after the massacre.

The plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim "alleged that Defendants appropriated the name ’Black Wall Street,’ a moniker for the [destroyed] Greenwood neighborhood" in tourism materials "without returning any of those benefits to members of the community" and thus unjustly enriching themselves.

OKLAHOMA SUPREME COURT’S HOLDING
"We . . . hold that Plaintiffs’ grievances do not fall within the scope of our state’s public nuisance statute," the decision reads, "and Plaintiffs’ allegations do not support a claim for . . . unjust enrichment."

The court rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the "lingering consequences" of the massacre created a public nuisance: "The continuing blight alleged . . . implicates generational-societal inequities that can only be resolved by policymakers—not the courts."

"Today’s holding," the court continued, "is consistent with our recent public nuisance jurisprudence: expanding public nuisance liability to include lingering social inequities from historical tragedies and injustices runs the risk of creating a new ’unlimited and unprincipled’ form of liability."
Related:
Oklahoma Supreme Court: 2023-12-27 Federal Judge Sides with Osage Nation, Orders Removal Of 84 Wind Turbines
Oklahoma Supreme Court: 2019-08-27 Oklahoma judge rules against drugmaker JNJ, orders $572M payment
Posted by:Frank G

#1  

The Question is legitimate.

How many survivors are still live? - ZERO.

How many attackers still are still live? - ZERO.

So why should any follow up generations be responsible for the EVIL done by previous generations of the past?

Why should current and future Innocent Taxpayers foot the bill to hand $$$ to people that never even seen or touched some victimized possible distance relation from 100+ years ago?

If allowed, shouldn't US Citizens be allowed to sue the DC politicians for all of their civil rights crimes against us?
Posted by: NN2N1   2024-06-13 10:33  

00:00