25 C.F.R. § 81.1
What is the purpose of this part?
This part prescribes the Department's procedures for authorizing and conducting elections when Federal statute or the terms of a tribal governing document require the Secretary to conduct and approve an election to:
(a) Adopt, amend, or revoke tribal governing documents; or
(b) Adopt or amend charters.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1965–2025 · leading case: Sandy Lake Band v. United States, 714 F.3d 1098 (8th Cir. 2013).
Sandy Lake Band v. United States, 714 F.3d 1098 (8th Cir. 2013). “In determining that it lacked jurisdiction, the district court “rejected] [Sandy Lake’s] contention that 25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (w) contradicts the definition of Indian tribe in 25 U.”
Mackinac Tribe v. Sally Jewell, 829 F.3d 754 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “1 See 25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (w) (2014). Interior is obligated to hold such an election— assuming the tribe qualifies—within 180 days of receipt of a tribal request.”
Muscogee (Creek) Nation, a Federally Recognized Indian Tribe v. Donald Hodel, Sec'y, U.S. Dep't of Interior, 851 F.2d 1439 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “The Regulations designed to implement both the IRA and the OIWA define constitution as follows: “Constitution” or “Constitution and Bylaws” means the written organizational framework of any tribe reorganized pursuant to a Federal statute for the exercise of governmental powers.”
Carcieri v. Kempthorne, 497 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 2005). “25 C.F.R. § 81.1 . As to the Secretary’s trust acquisition practice, it is not seriously disputed that the Secretary has never rejected an application to take land into trust for a federally recognized tribe on the ground that the tribe was not recognized and under federal…”
Mackinac Tribe v. Jewell, 87 F. Supp. 3d 127 (D.D.C. 2015). “See 25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (g); see also Felix Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law § 4.”
Sandra Thomas v. United States of Am., 189 F.3d 662 (7th Cir. 1999). “At its base, this lawsuit is a challenge to the way certain federal officials administered an election for which they were both substantively and procedurally responsible.”
Simmons v. Eagle Seelatsee, 244 F. Supp. 808 (E.D. Wash. 1965). “See 25 C.F.R. 81.1 and “Federal Indian Law”, (1958 Revision of Cohen), pp.”
Coyote Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. United States, 639 F. Supp. 165 (E.D. Cal. 1986). “4 provides that BIA officials “will cooperate with and offer advice and assistance (including the proposing of amendments), to any tribe in drafting a constitution.”
Thomas v. United States, 141 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (W.D. Wis. 2001). “25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (s) defines a “Secretarial election” as “an election held within a tribe pursuant to regulations prescribed by Federal Statute” and distinguishes Secretarial elections from tribal elections, which are *1203 elections “conducted under tribal authority.”
Carcieri v. Kempthorne, 497 F.3d 15 (1st Cir. 2007). “25 C.F.R. § 81.1 . As to the Secretary's trust acquisition practice, it is not seriously disputed that the Secretary has never rejected an application to take land into trust for a federally recognized tribe on the ground that the tribe was not recognized and under federal…”
King v. Norton, 160 F. Supp. 2d 755 (E.D. Mich. 2001). “25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (s). Tribes are sovereign only to the extent that their sovereignty has not been qualified by statute or treaties.”
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Cmty. v. Babbitt, 107 F.3d 667 (8th Cir. 1997). “" 25 C.F.R. § 81.1 (o) (emphasis added). Thus, although this regulation does not permit the Secretary to hear a challenge brought by a person who was not registered to vote, nothing in the language explicitly prevents a registered voter from bringing a challenge to the overall…”
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.