Tulsa Race Riot ReparationsRiot Survivors Take Case to Highest Court
March 9, 2005 Survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Riot – some over 100 years old – visited the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday, March 9th, seeking justice and reparations from the City of Tulsa and the State of Oklahoma. The Tulsa Race Riot is one of our nation’s worst incidents of racial violence. African-American survivors of the “Riot” filed a lawsuit against the City and State after an official Commission established by the State of Oklahoma determined that government officials had not, as authorities had led the public to believe, been overwhelmed by white vigilantes, but had actively organized and participated in mob violence that overnight killed over 300 African-Americans, burned 42 square blocks to ashes, and left 8,000 Greenwood residents homeless and penniless. Plaintiffs are seeking restitution and repair of the injuries caused by the City and State. The plaintiffs include noted historian Dr. John Hope Franklin, who served as the Chair of President Clinton’s Commission on Race and whose father’s law office was burned to the ground by rioters. Since 2003, a legal team led by Harvard Professor Charles J. Ogletree, Michael Hausfeld, Michele Roberts and Adjoa Aiyetoro have, with others, demanded restitution for the African American community of Greenwood, which has yet to receive justice. For more than 50 years, the details of the riot remained hidden, until uncovered by the Oklahoma Commission. A historian from the Commission will accompany the survivors, including 102-year old Otis Clark, to the Court. “The white community of Tulsa set out to kill and injure as many black people as possible,” said attorney for the victims Michael Hausfeld, "In 82 years, who has been brought to justice?” “The time for justice in Tulsa is long overdue, and we will fight for our clients until the last breath. This case cries out for justice,” said Professor Ogletree. The survivor’s case was dismissed by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, which held that although “in the immediate aftermath of the Riot and for several decades thereafter, extraordinary circumstances justified tolling the statute of limitations,” plaintiffs should have known to file suit before the Riot Commission issued its report. In a dissent, Judge Lucero, noted that no case in his tenure on the court could be more compellingly described as “a question of exceptional importance” and that the Court’s holding placed the plaintiffs in “an untenable position” in light of the government’s official concealment of its conduct. The Petition for Writ of Certiorari was filed with the clerk at 11 a.m. Contacts:
- Audrey Braccio (abraccio@cmht.com), Cohen Milstein: 202-408-4600
- Colin Ovitsky (ovitsky@law.harvard.edu): 617-496-2054
|
