Salazar v. Patchak
Linked with:
| Docket No. | Op. Below | Argument | Opinion | Vote | Author | Term |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11-247 | D.C. Cir. | Apr 24, 2012 | Jun 18, 2012 | 8-1 | Kagan | OT 2011 |
Holding: The federal government has waived its sovereign immunity from the respondent"s suit under the Administrative Procedure Act, in which he alleges that Section 465 of the Indian Reorganization Act did not authorize the Secretary of the Interior to acquire into trust property that the Band intended to use for "gaming purposes" because the Band was not a federally recognized tribe when the Indian Reorganization Act was enacted in 1934. Moreover, the respondent has prudential standing to challenge the Secretary"s acquisition of the land in question.
Judgment: Affirmed, 8-1, in an opinion by Justice Kagan on June 18, 2012.
SCOTUSblog Coverage
- Argument recap: Searching for a middle ground in Indian casino case (Kevin Russell, April 27, 2012)
- Argument preview: Seeking to undo casino land deal (Kevin Russell, April 20, 2012)
- December grants: In Plain English (Amy Howe, January 4, 2012)
- Another landmark ruling in the offing (Lyle Denniston, December 12, 2011)
- Petition of the day (Marissa Miller, September 15, 2011)
Merits Briefs for the Petitioners
- Brief for the Federal Petitioners
- Reply Brief for the Federal Petitioners
- Brief for the Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of the Pottawatomie Indians
- Reply Brief for Petitioner Match-E-Be-Nash-She-Wish Band of Pottawatomie Indians
Merits Briefs for the Respondents
[##CERT-STAGE##]