25 C.F.R. § 151.7

Is Tribal consent required for nonmember acquisitions?

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

An individual Indian or Tribe may acquire land in trust status on an Indian reservation other than its own only when the governing body of the Tribe having jurisdiction over such reservation consents in writing to the acquisition; provided, that such consent shall not be required if the individual Indian or the Tribe already owns an undivided trust or restricted interest in the parcel of land to be acquired.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1987–2024 · leading case: Hodel v. Irving, 481 U.S. 704 (1987).
Hodel v. Irving, 481 U.S. 704 (1987). · cites it 2× “[6] The memorandum stated: "To assure the effectiveness of a will or heirship succession under state law, any Indian owner within the above category (if he or she is concerned that the tribe rather than his or her heirs or devisees will take these interests) may purchase…”
Comanche Nation v. Ware (W.D. Okla. 2024). · cites it 9× “Count One: Violation of 25 C.F.R. § 151.7 In Count One, raised in the Amended Complaint against Defendants DOI, Newland, and LaCounte (collectively, the “BIA Defendants”), Comanche Nation seeks “a declaration that the Tsalote Allotment is not owned by the FSA Tribe.”
Comanche Nation v. Ware (W.D. Okla. 2024). “Because the FSA Tribe does not have jurisdiction over the allotment, the allotment is not part of the FSA Tribe’s reservation, and the FSA Tribe’s acquisition of the allotment was invalid under 25 C.F.R. § 151.7 (formerly § 151.8), it is alleged that the tribal gaming is being…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.