25 U.S.C. § 397
Leases of lands for grazing or mining
Where lands are occupied by Indians who have bought and paid for the same, and which lands are not needed for farming or agricultural purposes, and are not desired for individual allotments, the same may be leased by authority of the council speaking for such Indians, for a period not to exceed five years for grazing, or ten years for mining purposes in such quantities and upon such terms and conditions as the agent in charge of such reservation may recommend, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18
cases, 1931–2016 · leading case: Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians
Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians (1985)
“795 , 25 U. S. C. § 397 (1891 Act). The Act authorized leases for terms not to exceed 10 years on lands "bought and paid for" by the Indians.”
Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma v. United States (1990)
“Part 162 (1989) and 25 U.S.C. § 397 (1982). Defendant argued that 25 C.”
Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico (1989)
“795 , 25 U. S. C. § 397 (1891 Act). That legislation, which empowered tribes to enter into grazing and mining leases, only applied to lands "occupied by Indians who have bought and paid for the same," and was thus interpreted to be inapplicable to Executive Order reservations.”
Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Pueblo of Santa Ana (1985)
“795 , 25 U. S. C. § 397 (grazing and mining leases); Act of Aug.”
Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe (1982)
“795 , 25 U. S. C. §397 . Because the statute applied only to lands “occupied by Indians who have bought and paid for the same,” the statute was interpreted to be inapplicable to reservations created by Executive Order.”
Odenwalt v. Zaring (1980)
“§ 391 (restrictions on alienation of Indian land); and 25 U.S.C. § 397 (leasing of Indian lands).”
Ute Mountain Ute Tribe v. Rodriguez (2011)
“795 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 397 ). At that time, the doctrine *1193 of "intergovernmental tax immunity" was the prevailing law, under which "States were powerless to impose severance taxes on oil produced on Indian reservations unless Congress expressly waived that immunity.”
Crow Tribe of Indians v. State of Montana, and Ramon Dore, Director, Montana Department of Revenue (1981)
“The latter statute contained no provision for Indian consent to the leases and permitted the Secretary to prescribe reasonable terms and conditions.”
Blackfeet Tribe of Indians v. State of Mont. (1981)
“FEDERAL STATUTES By an act of Congress dated February 28, 1891, hereinafter the “1891 Act”, found in 25 U.S.C. § 397 , the federal government authorized mineral leases of Indian land under such terms and conditions as the Tribe might recommend, subject to the approval of the…”
Glenny A. Lazore, Carol L. Lazore v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Service (1993)
“Congress has also legislated frequently with respect to the right of all Indians within the United States to alienate reservation lands by lease or transfer.”
Fredericks v. United States (2016)
“Another such act is the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, codified today at 25 U.S.C. §§ 415 , 415a-415d.”
Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe (1980)
“See 25 U.S.C. §§ 397 , 398. Thus, the Secretary of the Interior, with the consent of the tribal council, was charged with the responsibility of conductings public auction to obtain the best terms possible for the Indians.”
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.