25 C.F.R. § 292.11

What are “restored lands”?

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

For newly acquired lands to qualify as ”restored lands” for purposes of § 292.7, the tribe acquiring the lands must meet the requirements of paragraph (a), (b), or (c) of this section.

(a) If the tribe was restored by a Congressional enactment of legislation recognizing, acknowledging, affirming, reaffirming, or restoring the government-to-government relationship between the United States and the tribe, the tribe must show that either:

(1) The legislation requires or authorizes the Secretary to take land into trust for the benefit of the tribe within a specific geographic area and the lands are within the specific geographic area; or

(2) If the legislation does not provide a specific geographic area for the restoration of lands, the tribe must meet the requirements of § 292.12.

(b) If the tribe is acknowledged under § 83.8 of this chapter, it must show that it:

(1) Meets the requirements of § 292.12; and

(2) Does not already have an initial reservation proclaimed after October 17, 1988.

(c) If the tribe was restored by a Federal court determination in which the United States is a party or by a court-approved settlement agreement entered into by the United States, it must meet the requirements of § 292.12.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2010–2021 · leading case: Butte Cnty., Cal. v. Hogen, 613 F.3d 190 (D.C. Cir. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Butte Cnty., Cal. v. Hogen, 613 F.3d 190 (D.C. Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “" 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 (a)(1). That situation, not present here, describes City of Roseville v.”

Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde Cmty. of Oregon v. Jewell, 830 F.3d 552 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “6 (2008)); 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 (b)(2) (2008). 7 . In 2015, Interior updated and revised the Part 83 regulations, eliminating this particular "base roll” limitation provision.”

Nebraska Ex Rel. Bruning v. United States Dep't of Interior, 625 F.3d 501 (8th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “See 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 . Therefore, the States maintain that even if the NIGC had authority to alter the basis on which the parcel was taken into trust, the land cannot qualify as "restored lands" as a matter of law because it lies outside of the two-county area stipulated by…”

City of Council Bluffs v. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 11 F.4th 852 (8th Cir. 2021). “See 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 . But the question on appeal is the meaning of the Ponca Restoration Act, and the agency’s interpretation of a different statute does not affect our conclusion about whether the Restoration Act precludes gaming on the parcel in Carter Lake.”

E. Band of Cherokee Indians v. United States Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2021). · cites it 6× “12 ) to determine whether the lands qualify as “restored,” and under the correct regulation ( 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 (a)(1)) they do not; and (iii) even if section 292.”

City of Council Bluffs v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 368 F. Supp. 3d 1276 (S.D. Iowa 2019). · cites it 4× “First, 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 sets out the test for determining if trust lands are "restored lands" under the IGRA.”

Confederated Tribes of the Grand Ronde Cmty. of Oregon v. Jewell, 830 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “6 (2008)); 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 (b)(2) (2008). . In 2015, Interior updated and revised the Part 83 regulations, eliminating this particular “base roll" limitation provision.”

— 25 C.F.R. § 292.11(a)(1) — 1 case

E. Band of Cherokee Indians v. United States Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2021). “12 ) to determine whether the lands qualify as “restored,” and under the correct regulation ( 25 C.F.R. § 292.11 (a)(1)) they do not; and (iii) even if section 292.”

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.