sovereign immunity

Supreme Court Decides Question involving Federal Immunity and the Little Tucker Act

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s opinion in United States v. Bormes.

An excerpt from Justice Scalia’s unanimous opinion:

[The Federal Circuit] distorted our case law in applying to FCRA the immunity-waiver standard we expressed in White Mountain Apache Tribe, 537 U. S., at 472: whether the statute “‘can fairly be interpreted as mandating compensation by the Federal Government for the damage sustained.’ ” 626 F. 3d, at 578. That is the test for determining whether a statute that imposes an obligation but does not provide the elements of a cause of action qualifies for suit under the Tucker Act—more specifically, whether the failure to perform an obligation undoubtedly imposed on the Federal Government creates a right to monetary relief. See White Mountain Apache Tribe, supra; Mitchell II, 463 U. S. 206. That test is not relevant when a “mandate of compensation” is contained in a statute that provides a detailed judicial remedy against those who are subject to its requirements. FCRA is such a statute. By using the “fair interpretation” test to determine whether FCRA’s civil liability provisions apply to the United States, the Federal Circuit directed the test to a purpose for which it was not designed and leapfrogged the threshold concern that the Tucker Act cannot be superimposed on an existing remedial scheme.

Available Briefs in Second Circuit Appeal of Constitutional Challenge to IGRA and Seneca Compacts

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the appellee briefs in Warren v. United States:

Brief for Federal Appellees

Brief for New York Appellees

Brief for Seneca Nation Amicus

Lower court materials here.

Washington Bar Journal Article on AUTO v. State (Challenge to Tribal Tax Agreements)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Page 24 of this PDF.

Materials (so far) in Tribal Court Jurisdiction Matter involving Tort Claim against On-Reservation Public School

Matthew L.M. Fletcher3 Comments

Here are the materials in Fort Yates Public School District #4 v. Murphy (D. N.D.):

Fort Yates School District TRO Brief

DCT OrderGrantingTRO-23Oct12

Murphy Motion to Dismiss

Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Amicus Brief

Tribal court materials:

Fort Yates School District Tribal Court Motion to Dismiss

SRST Tribal Court Opinion

 

Tenth Circuit Rejects Muscogee Challenge to HUD’s Demand for Investment Proceeds

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the opinion.

Briefs and link to lower court materials here.

Arizona Appeals Court Affirms Denial of Worker’s Comp Jurisdiction over Tribal Gaming Insurer

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the memorandum opinion in Carter v Arizona Industrial Commission (Ariz. App.).

Challenge to Repatriation of “La Jolla Skeletons” Dismissed

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials in White v. Regents of the University of California (N.D. Cal.):

Corrected UCSD Brief and Motion to Dismiss

KCRC Motion to Dismiss

White Opposition

University Reply

KCRC Reply

DCT Order Granting Motion to Dismiss

Our prior post on this case is here.

Eleventh Circuit Affirms IRS Authority to Issue Subpoenas of Miccosukee Records

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Miccosukee Tribe of Indians v. United States.

An excerpt:

This appeal presents three issues: (1) whether the Miccosukee Tribe may assert tribal sovereign immunity to quash summonses issued to third-party financial institutions by the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service to obtain tribal financial records relevant to an ongoing tax investigation; (2) whether the Commissioner issued the summonses for a proper purpose; and (3) whether the Tribe has standing to bring an overbreadth challenge to summonses issued to third parties and, if so, whether the summonses were overbroad. In 2010, the Commissioner issued four summonses to third-party financial institutions to determine whether the Tribe had complied with its federal withholding requirements during the period from 2006 to 2009. The Tribe petitioned to quash the summonses on the grounds of sovereign immunity, improper purpose, relevance, bad faith, and overbreadth. The district court denied those petitions. Because we conclude that tribal sovereign immunity does not bar the issuance of these third-party summonses, the district court did not clearly err when it found that the summonses were issued for a proper purpose, and the Tribe lacks standing to challenge the summonses for overbreadth, we affirm.

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Dismisses Suit over Coalbed Methane Ownership Dispute on Tribal Immunity Grounds

Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here are the materials in Farmer Oil & Gas Properties v. Southern Ute Indian Tribe (D. Colo.):

DCT Order Granting Southern Ute Motion

Southern Ute Motion to Dismiss

Farmer Oil Response

Southern Ute Reply

Update in Navajo Dine CARE v. Salazar Suit re Navajo Mine — Additional Update (11/6/12)

Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the updated materials:

Complaint post

Navajo Intervention and Motion to Dismiss post

Diné CARE Response

Navajo Reply

Update: FINAL 2012-10-18 Dine C.A.R.E.,et al. v. Salazar Not. Supp. Auth.