Patchak v. Zinke

Holding: David Patchak filed suit challenging the authority of the secretary of the Interior Department to take into trust a property (Bradley Property) on which Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians wished to build a casino. In an earlier appeal in the case, the Supreme Court held that the secretary lacked sovereign immunity and that Patchak had standing, and it remanded the case for further proceedings. Congress subsequently enacted the Gun Lake Act, which “reaffirmed as trust land” the Bradley Property, Section 2(a), and provided that “an action . . . relating to [that] land shall not be filed or maintained in a Federal court and shall be promptly dismissed,” Section 2(b). The court of appeals properly affirmed the district court’s dismissal of Patchak’s lawsuit pursuant to that statute.

Judgment: Affirmed, 6-3, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on February 27, 2018. Justice Thomas, joined by Justices Breyer, Alito and Kagan, concluded that Section 2(b) of the Gun Lake Act does not violate Article III of the Constitution. Justice Breyer filed a concurring opinion. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which Justice Sotomayor joined, concluding that Congress acted effectively to displace the Administrative Procedure Act’s waiver of immunity for suits against the United States — which enabled Patchak to launch this litigation — with a contrary command applicable to the Bradley Property. Justice Sotomayor filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, concluding that that Section 2(b) of the Gun Lake Act is most naturally read as having restored the Federal Government’s sovereign immunity from Patchak’s suit challenging the trust status of the Bradley Property. Chief Justice Roberts filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justices Kennedy and Gorsuch joined.

SCOTUSblog Coverage

• In Recess #7: "Robot Ban" (First Mondays)
• Opinion analysis: Sharply divided court narrowly approves Congress’ power to resolve pending litigation (Ronald Mann)
• OT2017 #6: "Year of Munsingwear" (First Mondays)
• Argument analysis: Justices struggle to find the “beef” in challenge to congressional authority to resolve pending litigation (Ronald Mann)
• OT2017 #5: “Oglethorpe’s Second Cousin” (First Mondays)
• Argument preview: Indian case turns justices’ scrutiny to Congress’ power to use statutes to circumvent pending litigation (Ronald Mann)
• In Recess #4: "Stone Soup" (First Mondays)
• Today's orders (Amy Howe)
• Petition of the day (Kate Howard)