25 C.F.R. § 5.1

Definitions

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

For purposes of making appointments to vacancies in all positions in the Bureau of Indian Affairs a preference will be extended to persons of Indian descent who are:

(a) Members of any recognized Indian tribe now under Federal Jurisdiction;

(b) Descendants of such members who were, on June 1, 1934, residing within the present boundaries of any Indian reservation;

(c) All others of one-half or more Indian blood of tribes indigenous to the United States;

(d) Eskimos and other aboriginal people of Alaska; and

(e) For one (1) year or until the Osage Tribe has formally organized, whichever comes first, effective January 5, 1989, a person of at least one-quarter degree Indian ancestry of the Osage Tribe of Indians, whose rolls were closed by an act of Congress.

[43 FR 2393, Jan. 17, 1978. Redesignated at 47 FR 13327, Mar. 30, 1982, as amended at 54 FR 283, Jan. 5, 1989]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1985–2017 · leading case: United States v. Cruz, 554 F.3d 840 (9th Cir. 2009).
United States v. Cruz, 554 F.3d 840 (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 4× “In fact, Cruz would not have been eligible for preferential treatment under the Indian Preference Laws, as he is not a member of a recognized tribe and has less than "one-half or more Indian blood of tribes indigenous to the United States.”
Diane Zarr v. Earl Barlow, Dir., Off. of Indian Educ. Programs, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 800 F.2d 1484 (9th Cir. 1986). “§ 1452 , Indian Financing Act of 1974); 25 C.F.R. § 5.1 (a) (Indian Preference in Employment); 25 C.”
Bordeaux v. Hunt, 621 F. Supp. 637 (D.S.D. 1985). “§ 472 , which has been implemented by 25 C.F.R. § 5.1 , stating, in part, that “a preference will be extended to persons of Indian descent who are .”
Nakai v. Jewell (D.D.C. 2017). · cites it 2× “BACKGROUND In March 2013, Plaintiff requested Verification of Indian Preference for Employment with the Bureau of Indian Affairs (“BIA”) and the Indian Health Service under 25 C.F.R. § 5.1 , both of which extend hiring preference to persons of Indian descent, including, among…”
United States v. Cruz (9th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “535 (1974); 25 C.F.R. § 5.1 , there is no indication in the trial record that Cruz ever received any preferential treatment on the basis of his ancestry.”
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.