In the ongoing legal clash between the Muscogee Creek Nation and the City of Tulsa concerning the enforcement of traffic laws on tribal members, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt has stepped in by filing a motion to intervene. Governor Stitt's decision comes amidst debates over criminal jurisdiction and the state's rights to uphold its own laws within its territory. According to a report by the Oklahoma Governor's Office, the dispute touches on fundamental aspects of state sovereignty and the reach of municipal police powers.

The motion by Stitt argues that the lawsuit poses a direct challenge to the State and its political subdivisions' authority. It emphasizes the critical nature of the state's interests, which are not adequately represented by either the Creek Nation or the City of Tulsa in the case. The Governor's move is rooted in the need to ensure the legal parameters governing state sovereignty are maintained, particularly when it comes to enforcing laws and upholding public order. As stated in the motion obtained by the Governor's Office, "The absence of the State here will, as a practical matter, impair or impede the State’s sovereign interest in enforcing its laws, using its police powers, and protecting its citizens."

The case, Muscogee Creek Nation v. City of Tulsa, is a microcosm of the larger issues at hand, implicating both tribal sovereignty and the rights of state and local governments to enact and enforce laws within their jurisdictions. Governor Stitt’s involvement signals the significance Oklahoma places on asserting its authority in Native American issues that remain contentious and complex. The motion cites the importance of states' "legitimate interest in the continued enforce[ment] of [their] own statutes," hinting at the underlying tensions that can arise in dual-sovereignty frameworks, as reported by the Governor's office.