25 C.F.R. § 83.7
How does this part apply to documented petitions submitted before August 17, 2015?
(a) Any petitioner who has not submitted a complete documented petition as of July 31, 2015 must proceed under these revised regulations. We will notify these petitioners and provide them with a copy of the revised regulations by July 31, 2015.
(b) By August 31, 2015, OFA will notify each petitioner that has submitted complete documented petitions but has not yet received a final agency decision that it must proceed under these revised regulations unless it chooses by September 29, 2015 to complete the petitioning process under the previous version of the acknowledgment regulations as published in 25 CFR part 83, revised as of April 1, 1994.
(c) Any petitioner who has submitted a documented petition under the previous version of the acknowledgment regulations and chooses to proceed under these revised regulations does not need to submit a new documented petition, but may supplement its petition.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 64
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Samish Indian Nation v. United States, 419 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
Samish Indian Nation v. United States, 419 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2005). “An administrative hearing was conducted and, on August 31, 1995, the ALJ issued detailed proposed findings and recommended granting the Samish federal recognition pursuant to the criteria in 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 (“ALJ Recommendation”). He forwarded the proposed findings and…”
Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009). “If a tribe satisfies the stringent criteria established by the Secretary to qualify for federal recognition, including the requirement that the tribe prove that it “has existed as a community from historical times until the present,” 25 CFR §83.7 (b) (2008), it is a fortiori an…”
KG Urban Enter., LLC v. Patrick, 693 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2012). “22, 2007) (finding that the Mashpee meet the criteria for federal acknowledgment under 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 ); Final Determination for Federal Acknowledgment of the Wampanoag Tribal Council of Gay Head, Inc.”
Muwekma Ohlone Tribe v. Kenneth Salazar, 708 F.3d 209 (D.C. Cir. 2013). “of Appellant 55, and also required that Muwekma provide “conclusive proof’ rather than merely a “reasonable likelihood of the validity of the facts relating to [the Part 83 criteria],” 25 C.”
United States v. Washington, 593 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. 2010). “7(a)" and substitute therefor " 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 (a)." At slip op. 16410, first full paragraph, line 14: Delete " 25 C.”
Greene v. Babbitt, 943 F. Supp. 1278 (W.D. Wash. 1996). “The Proposed Findings substantiated that the Samish met the mandatory criteria for federal acknowl-edgement as set forth in 25 C.F.R § 83.7. The ALJ’s opinion and recommendations were then sent to the Assistant Secretary of the Interior for a final determination.”
Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl, 133 S. Ct. 2552 (2013). “25 CFR §83.7 (e) (2012). The majority’s treatment of this issue, in the end, does no more than create a lingering mood of disapprobation of the criteria for membership adopted by the Cherokee Nation that, in turn, make Baby Girl an “Indian child” under the statute.”
Schaghticoke Tribal Nation v. Kempthorne, 587 F. Supp. 2d 389 (D. Conn. 2008). “25 C.F.R. § 83.7 . A petition must be denied if the available evidence “demonstrates that it does not meet one or more of the criteria,” or if there is “insufficient evidence that it meets one or more of the criteria.”
Agua Caliente Tribe of Cupeno v. Tara Katuk Mac Lean Sweeney, 932 F.3d 1207 (9th Cir. 2019). “” 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 . There are currently 573 federally recognized tribes.”
United States v. Damien Zepeda, 792 F.3d 1103 (9th Cir. 2015). “§ 500n (defining “natives of Alaska” as “native Indians, Eskimos, and Aleuts of whole or part blood inhabiting Alaska at the time of the Treaty of Cession of Alaska to the United States and their descendants of whole or part blood”); 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 (e) (to be eligible for…”
Miami Nation of Indians of Indiana, Inc. v. United States Dep't of the Interior, 255 F.3d 342 (7th Cir. 2001). “25 C.F.R. § 83.7 . In 1980, the Miami Nation of Indians of Indiana petitioned Interior for recognition that it was an Indian tribe.”
Muwekma Tribe v. Babbitt, 133 F. Supp. 2d 42 (D.D.C. 2001). “See 25 C.F.R. § 83.7 . If the petitioning tribe can demonstrate previous federal acknowledgment, 1 it need only demonstrate continued tribal existence since the time of prior federal acknowledgment.”
— 25 C.F.R. § 83.7(a) — 2 cases
United States v. Washington, 593 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. 2009).
United States v. State of Washington (9th Cir. 2010).
— 25 C.F.R. § 83.7(b) — 1 case
Native Am. Mohegans v. United States, 184 F. Supp. 2d 198 (D. Conn. 2002).
— 25 C.F.R. § 83.7(e) — 2 cases
United States v. Washington, 593 F.3d 790 (9th Cir. 2009).
United States v. State of Washington (9th Cir. 2010).
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.