The Supreme Court released the decision in United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation today. You can access the decision here. Justice Kennedy wrote the decision finding against the tribe. He was joined by Chief Justice Roberts, and Justice Scalia, Justice Thomas and Justice Alito. Justice Sotomayor wrote a concurrence, which Justice Breyer joined. Justice Ginsberg wrote the dissent. Justice Kagan took no part in the case.
I’m sure we’ll have more up throughout the day, but here’s the last paragraph of the opinion:
The holding here precludes the CFC from exercising jurisdiction over the Nation’s suit while the District Court case is pending. Should the Nation choose to dismiss the latter action, or upon that action’s completion, the Nation is free to file suit again in the CFC if the statute of limitations is no bar. In the meantime, and in light of the substantial overlap in operative facts between them, the two suits are “for or in respect to” the same claim under §1500, and the CFC case must be dismissed. The contrary judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Turtle Talk 
This is a federal jurisdiction ruling, not really an Indian law opinion. For the moment, the lesson of TON is that one must file first in the Court of Federal Claims, NOT in district court. This is the long-standing “Tecon rule.” Justice Sotomayer also comments that the validity of Tecon is not presented here. However, we should notice the way the majority refers to Tecon and choose one court or the other, not rely on filing in the correct sequence. The Court’s rationale today suggests that Tecon will not stand up:
“The panel of the Court of Appeals could not identify “any purpose that §1500 serves today,” 559 F. 3d, at 1292, in large part because it was bound by Circuit precedent that left the statute without meaningful force. For example, the panel cited Tecon Engineers, Inc. v. United States , 170 Ct. Cl. 389, 343 F. 2d 943 (1965), which held that §1500 does not prohibit two identical suits from proceeding so long as the action in the CFC, or at that time the Court of Claims, is filed first. The Tecon holding is not presented in this case because the CFC action here was filed after the District Court suit.”