In a decision that has dampened the hopes of advocates for racial justice, the Oklahoma Supreme Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by survivors of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre. The court upheld the ruling made by a district court judge in Tulsa last year, stating that the plaintiffs' grievances, while legitimate, did not fall within the scope of the state's public nuisance statute.

The lawsuit sought to hold the city of Tulsa and other defendants accountable for the destruction of the Greenwood district, a once-thriving Black community referred to as Black Wall Street. During the violent events of May 31 and June 1, 1921, a white mob, some deputized by authorities, looted and burned the district, resulting in the death of as many as 300 Black Tulsans and leaving the area in ruins.

However, the court determined that the plaintiffs did not provide sufficient evidence of physical injury to property in Greenwood that could be resolved through civil remedies or injunctions. The court's decision stated, "Plaintiffs do not point to any physical injury to property in Greenwood rendering it uninhabitable that could be resolved by way of injunction or other civil remedy."

The lawsuit also contended that Tulsa's long history of racial division and tension was rooted in the massacre and sought compensation for the losses suffered by victims and the construction of a hospital in north Tulsa, among other things. The court, however, found that the plaintiffs' allegations did not support a claim for unjust enrichment, typically limited to contractual relationships.

The city of Tulsa, in a statement, expressed its respect for the court's decision and emphasized its commitment to ongoing efforts in the North Tulsa and Greenwood communities. The city pledged to work with residents and provide resources to support these communities.

The dismissal of the lawsuit represents a setback for advocates seeking reparations for the Tulsa Race Massacre. The destruction of the once-vibrant Greenwood district has had lasting impacts, leading to racial and economic disparities that persist to this day. Despite the court's decision, the fight for justice and acknowledgement of the events that occurred in 1921 is likely to continue.

It is worth noting that public nuisance claims, normally used to address local concerns such as blighted homes or illegal activities, have been applied in high-profile cases against tobacco companies and opioid drug makers. However, the majority of such cases have resulted in settlements rather than going to trial.

This ruling comes after the Oklahoma Supreme Court overturned a previous decision that used the public nuisance law to hold opioid drug maker Johnson & Johnson accountable for damages amounting to $465 million. That decision was reversed two years later.

The dismissal of the lawsuit represents a missed opportunity for the survivors and descendants of the Tulsa Race Massacre to seek financial amends for the devastating events that occurred a century ago. The impact of the court's decision is likely to reverberate throughout the advocacy community, as they continue their fight for justice and reparations.