U.S. Code » Title 25 » Chapter CHAPTER 14— MISCELLANEOUS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— INDIAN SELF-DETERMINATION AND EDUCATION ASSISTANCE › Part Part D— Tribal Self-Governance—Department of the Interior

25 U.S.C. § 458cc

Transferred

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

[transferred]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 2005–2014 · leading case: United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, 131 S. Ct. 2313 (2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, 131 S. Ct. 2313 (2011). “, 25 U. S. C. §458cc(a) (directing Secretary of the Interior to enter into funding agreements with Indian tribes “in a manner consis tent with the Federal Government’s laws and trust relationship to and responsibility for the Indian people”); §3701 (finding that the Govern ment…”
Loren Shirk v. United States, 773 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “See 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(1)–(2) (authorizing tribes to “plan, conduct, consolidate, and administer [certain] programs, services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof”).”
Reed v. Salazar, 744 F. Supp. 2d 98 (D.D.C. 2010). · cites it 3× “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Red Lake Band v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 624 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 2× “§ 450f), and not to tribes — like Plaintiff — having contracts under Title IV of Public Law 93-638 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 458cc). Id. ¶ 46. BIA Director Rags-dale explained at his deposition that, although the latter self-governance tribes, including Plaintiff, were…”
Citizen Potawatomi Nation v. Salazar, 624 F. Supp. 2d 103 (D.D.C. 2009). “25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(8)(A). Under the provisions governing self-determination contracts, tribes may submit proposals to the Department for such contracts which, if approved, would allow them to oversee certain programs with the use of Department funds.”
Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe v. Ryan, 415 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(2). The Department has interpreted “otherwise available” as describing programs eligible for self-determination contracts under Title I.”
Reed v. Kempthorne (D.D.C. 2010). · cites it 3× “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Blue Goose All. v. Salazar (D.D.C. 2010). · cites it 3× “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Samish Indian Nation v. United States, 657 F.3d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2011). “, 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(a) (noting the “Federal Government’s laws and trust relationship to and responsibility for the Indian people.”
Red Lake Band of Chippewa Indians v. United States of Am. Dep't of the Interior (D.D.C. 2009). “§ 450f), and not to tribes—like Plaintiff—having contracts under Title IV of Public Law 93-638 (codified at 25 U.S.C. § 458cc). Pl.’s Stmt.¶ 46. As BIA Director Ragsdale explained at deposition: Self-governance tribes [such as Plaintiff] were eligible for funds, but my…”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(a) — 2 cases
United States v. Jicarilla Apache Nation, 131 S. Ct. 2313 (2011). “, 25 U. S. C. §458cc(a) (directing Secretary of the Interior to enter into funding agreements with Indian tribes “in a manner consis tent with the Federal Government’s laws and trust relationship to and responsibility for the Indian people”); §3701 (finding that the Govern ment…”
Samish Indian Nation v. United States, 657 F.3d 1316 (Fed. Cir. 2011). “, 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(a) (noting the “Federal Government’s laws and trust relationship to and responsibility for the Indian people.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(1) — 1 case
Loren Shirk v. United States, 773 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2014). “See 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(1)–(2) (authorizing tribes to “plan, conduct, consolidate, and administer [certain] programs, services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof”).”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(2) — 1 case
Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe v. Ryan, 415 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2005). “25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(2). The Department has interpreted “otherwise available” as describing programs eligible for self-determination contracts under Title I.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(8)(A) — 1 case
Citizen Potawatomi Nation v. Salazar, 624 F. Supp. 2d 103 (D.D.C. 2009). “25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(8)(A). Under the provisions governing self-determination contracts, tribes may submit proposals to the Department for such contracts which, if approved, would allow them to oversee certain programs with the use of Department funds.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(l) — 1 case
Loren Shirk v. United States, 773 F.3d 999 (9th Cir. 2014). “See 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(1)–(2) (authorizing tribes to “plan, conduct, consolidate, and administer [certain] programs, services, functions, and activities, or portions thereof”).”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(c) — 4 cases
Reed v. Salazar, 744 F. Supp. 2d 98 (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Hoopa Valley Indian Tribe v. Ryan, 415 F.3d 986 (9th Cir. 2005). “25 U.S.C. § 458cc(b)(2). The Department has interpreted “otherwise available” as describing programs eligible for self-determination contracts under Title I.”
Reed v. Kempthorne (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Blue Goose All. v. Salazar (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
— 25 U.S.C. § 458cc(k) — 3 cases
Reed v. Salazar, 744 F. Supp. 2d 98 (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Reed v. Kempthorne (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
Blue Goose All. v. Salazar (D.D.C. 2010). “As amended, the ISDEAA contains the following disclaimer: Nothing in this section [25 U.S.C. § 458cc] is intended or shall be construed to expand or alter existing statutory authorities in the Secretary so as to authorize the Secretary to enter into any agreement under…”
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.