Ex Parte Webb.

Background

A man was arrested in Vinita for carrying intoxicating liquor into what had been the Indian Territory. He sought a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that Oklahoma’s admission as a State and later state laws and constitution wiped out older federal laws that banned introducing liquor into Indian country. The Government relied on a federal law of 1895 and later statutes and treaties with the Five Tribes to support federal jurisdiction and prosecution.

Reasoning

The Court focused on whether the Oklahoma Enabling Act and statehood repealed the 1895 federal prohibition on bringing liquor into the Indian Territory from other states. The Court explained that Congress distinguished between internal state control over sales and the power to regulate interstate traffic and relations with Indian tribes. Treaties and agreements with the tribes and the language of the Enabling Act showed Congress intended to preserve federal power to prevent importation from outside the State. The Court therefore held the 1895 prohibition remains in force against interstate shipments, except as limited to liquor brought in under state-authorized agencies.

Real world impact

Because the federal ban on importing liquor into the former Indian Territory survives statehood, federal courts may punish people who bring alcoholic drinks into that area from other states. The state retains control over internal manufacture and limited agency sales under its constitution, but interstate shipments into the protected district remain subject to federal enforcement. The petitioner’s habeas corpus request was denied.