City insurance companies never compensated victims for their losses following the massacre.
Greenwood district, home to over 10,000 Black residents before the massacre in 1921, was reduced to ashes resulting in the killing of between 300 and 356 people and destruction of over 1,250 homes.
Last two known survivors, Viola Fletcher and Lessie Benningfield Randle, filed suit under Oklahoma's public nuisance law.
Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed lawsuit seeking reparations for Tulsa Race Massacre survivors on June 13, 2024.
In a significant legal setback for survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, the Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed their lawsuit seeking reparations on June 13, 2024. The last two known survivors, Viola Fletcher and Lessie Benningfield Randle, had filed the suit under Oklahoma's public nuisance law in an attempt to hold the city and other defendants accountable for damages caused during one of the most devastating incidents of racist violence against Black people in U.S. history.
Greenwood, a thriving Black district with over 10,000 residents before the massacre, was reduced to ashes when a white mob attacked on May 31, 1921. The response resulted in the killing of between 300 and 356 people – predominantly African Americans – and the destruction of over 1,250 homes, schools, churches, and businesses.
The city insurance companies never compensated victims for their losses following the massacre. Racial and economic disparities still exist today as a result of this tragic event.
However, in its ruling on Wednesday, the Oklahoma Supreme Court sided with Tulsa officials who argued that the plaintiffs' grievances did not fall within the scope of Oklahoma's public nuisance statute. The court acknowledged that
The Supreme Court of Oklahoma dismissed a lawsuit by the last known survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, rejecting requests for reparations.
Accuracy
Oklahoma court dismisses lawsuit for Tulsa Massacre reparations filed by two surviving victims.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(75%)
The article contains an appeal to authority and a potential dichotomous depiction. The author cites the Supreme Court of Oklahoma's ruling as an appeal to authority (ex: 'The court ruling comes...'). Additionally, there may be a dichotomous depiction in the phrase 'the court wrote that requests by survivors to redress harms flowing from the massacre do not fall within the scope of... public nuisance... law' which could imply a false dichotomy between addressing historical wrongs through legal means or through policy changes.
The court ruling comes four years after three survivors of the massacre – Lessie Benningfield Randle, Viola Fletcher and Hughes Van Ellis – filed a lawsuit against the city of Tulsa and several local and state agencies and officials.
The Oklahoma supreme court dismissed a lawsuit of the last two survivors of the 1921 Tulsa race massacre, seeking restitution from the city and other defendants.
Greenwood was a thriving Black district in Tulsa with over 10,000 Black Americans before the massacre.
The response resulted in the killing of between 100 and 300 people, predominantly African Americans, and the destruction of over 1,200 homes, schools, churches and businesses.
Accuracy
Oklahoma court dismisses lawsuit for Tulsa Massacre reparations filed by two surviving victims
The Supreme Court of Oklahoma dismissed a lawsuit by the last known survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, rejecting requests for reparations.
Oklahoma supreme court dismisses lawsuit from survivors and their families of the Tulsa Race Massacre seeking reparations
The Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit arguing the remaining survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre should be compensated by the city for damages.
Survivors Hughes Van Ellis, Viola Fletcher and Lessie Benningfield Randle initally filed the lawsuit in 2021. Ellis died last year at the age of 102.
Accuracy
The lawsuit was previously dismissed by an Oklahoma district court judge who agreed with the city of Tulsa that
Oklahoma court dismisses lawsuit for Tulsa Massacre reparations filed by two surviving victims
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The authors make an appeal to authority by quoting the Oklahoma Supreme Court's decision and agreeing with it. They also use inflammatory rhetoric by describing the destruction of Greenwood neighborhood as 'laying waste to about 35 blocks' and 'robbing, beating and killing others'.
“However, the law does not permit us to extend the scope of our public nuisance doctrine beyond what the Legislature has authorized to afford Plaintiffs the justice they are seeking.”
“The destruction of forty-square blocks of property on the night of May 31, 1921 through murder and arson clearly meets the definition of a public nuisance under Oklahoma law. Faithful application of the law compels the conclusion that Mother Randle and Mother Fletcher have stated a claim for relief.”
“It just stays with me, you know, just the fear. I have lived in Tulsa since but I don’t sleep all night living there.”
