25 C.F.R. § 81.13

What types of voting assistance are provided for a Secretarial election?

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

If polling sites are required by the amendment or adoption article of the tribe's governing document, the Chair of the Secretarial Election Board will:

(a) Appoint interpreters;

(b) Ensure that audio or visual aids for the hearing or visually impaired are provided;

(c) Ensure that reasonable accommodations are made for others with impairments that would impede their ability to vote; and

(d) Allow the interpreter or Secretarial Election Board member to explain the election process and voting instructions. At the request of the voter, the interpreter or Board member may accompany the voter into the voting booth, but must not influence the voter in casting the ballot.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2025 · leading case: Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Cmty. v. Babbitt, 906 F. Supp. 513 (D. Minnesota 1995).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Cmty. v. Babbitt, 906 F. Supp. 513 (D. Minnesota 1995). · cites it 5× “) Objections to over 50% of these 111 persons were filed with the BIA pursuant to 25 C.F.R. § 81.13 . (Compl. ¶ 21.) The Election Board determined that 44 individuals did not meet the Community’s constitutional membership criteria and accordingly removed them from the list.”

Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux (Dakota) Cmty. v. Babbitt, 107 F.3d 667 (8th Cir. 1997). · cites it 8× “Although the regulations state that the election board's eligibility determinations "shall be final," 25 C.F.R. § 81.13 , they also provide that "[a]ny qualified voter .”

Thomas v. United States, 141 F. Supp. 2d 1185 (W.D. Wis. 2001). · cites it 2× “See 25 C.F.R. § 81.13 . Once the Secretary receives a qualifying request to hold an election to ratify proposed amendments, the Secretary must call and hold an election within 90 days.”

Channing v. Seneca-Cayuga Nation (N.D. Okla. 2025). “25 C.F.R. § 81.13 (2014). 3. Remand Is Not Required, because the Board’s Error Caused Crow No Prejudice and a Proper Consideration of His Challenge Would Change Nothing The Court next determines whether remand is necessary to allow for consideration of Crow’s challenge without…”

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.