25 U.S.C. § 398

Leases of unallotted lands for oil and gas mining purposes

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 25 CasesGoogle Scholar

Unallotted land on Indian reservations other than lands of the Five Civilized Tribes and the Osage Reservation subject to lease for mining purposes for a period of ten years under section 397 of this title may be leased at public auction by the Secretary of the Interior, with the consent of the council speaking for such Indians, for oil and gas mining purposes for a period of not to exceed ten years, and as much longer as oil or gas shall be found in paying quantities, and the terms of any existing oil and gas mining lease may in like manner be amended by extending the term thereof for as long as oil or gas shall be found in paying quantities: Provided, That the production of oil and gas and other minerals on such lands may be taxed by the State in which said lands are located in all respects the same as production on unrestricted lands, and the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to cause to be paid the tax so assessed against the royalty interests on said lands: Provided, however, That such tax shall not become a lien or charge of any kind or character against the land or the property of the Indian owner.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 28 cases, 1954–2015 · leading case: Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians (1985) scotus · cites it 8× “244 , 25 U. S. C. § 398 (1924 Act), and that the 1938 Act, under which the leases in question were issued, did not repeal this authorization.”

Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New Mexico (1989) scotus · cites it 4× “244 (1924 Act), current version at 25 U. S. C. § 398 . See also British-American Oil Producing Co.”

Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe (1982) scotus · cites it 2× “reservation or withdrawal created by Executive order for Indian purposes or for the use or occupancy of any Indians or tribe may be leased for oil and gas mining purposes in accordance with the provisions contained in the Act of May 29, 1924 [ 25 U. S. C. §398 ].” See also 25 U.…”

Ute Mountain Ute Tribe v. Rodriguez (2011) ca10 · cites it 6× “§ 398 (stating that "the production of oil and gas and other minerals on [tribal lands subject to lease for mining purposes] may be taxed by the State in which said lands are located in all respects the same as production on unrestricted lands").”

Mountain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Pueblo of Santa Ana (1985) scotus · cites it 2× “244 , 25 U. S. C. § 398 (mining leases). [8] Act of Feb.”

Peabody Coal Co. v. State (1988) arizctapp · cites it 5× “In disposing of most of the same arguments raised by Peabody here, the court relied to a great extent upon the applicability of 25 U.S.C. § 398 to the leases in question.”

McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission (1973) scotus “, 25 U. S. C. § 398 (congressional authorization for States to tax mineral production on unallotted tribal lahds).”

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Marshall Stranburg (2015) ca11 “at 1710-11 ; see also 25 U.S.C. § 398 ; 25 U.S.C. § 398c. These express authorizations in 1924 and 1927 were in line with the earlier doctrine.”

State Ex Rel. May v. Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma (1986) okla “(McCarran Amendment, as judicially interpreted, see Jicar-illa Apache Tribe v.”

Ollestead v. Native Village of Tyonek (1977) alaska “In 1963, pursuant to 25 U.S.C. § 398 (a), the Secretary of the Interior, with the Council’s consent, granted oil and gas leases covering a portion of the reservation.”

Industrial Uranium Co. v. State Tax Commission (1963) ariz · cites it 2× “§ 398 , unallotted lands on Indian reservations may be leased by the Secretary of the Interior with consent of the tribal council and the production of oil and gas and other minerals from such lands may be taxed by the state in which they are located in all respects the same as…”

Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes v. R. E. Nordwick (1967) ca9 · cites it 2× “244 , 25 U.S.C. § 398 (1964) (applicable to treaty reservations), and the Act of Mar.”

Show all 28 citing cases →

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.