25 U.S.C. § 903a
Omitted
[omitted]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1978–2004 · leading case: Webster v. Wisconsin Dep't of Revenue, 306 N.W.2d 701 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981).
Webster v. Wisconsin Dep't of Revenue, 306 N.W.2d 701 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). “34 The taxpayers admit that the use of the word “levy” in 25 U.S.C. §903a(d) is ambiguous and requires construction.”
United States v. Frank Long, 324 F.3d 475 (7th Cir. 2003). “The Menominee Restoration Act, for its part, makes clear that Congress intended to eliminate termination as a policy and practice and to restore the Menominee Tribe to its pre-“termination” status, 25 U.S.C. § 903a(b) (“[T]here are hereby reinstated all rights and privileges of…”
Barker v. Menominee Nation Casino, 897 F. Supp. 389 (E.D. Wis. 1995). “As noted by the defendants, the Tribe is a sovereign Indian tribe recognized by the United States government under 25 U.S.C. § 903a et seq. (Miller Aff. ¶ 6); therefore, its governing body, the Legislature, possesses “the common law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by…”
John Mark Latender v. Thomas Israel, Warden, 584 F.2d 817 (7th Cir. 1978). “The provisions pertinent here are paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 3, 25 U.S.C. §§ 903a(b) and (c): (b) The Act of June 17, 1954 ( 68 Stat.”
Sturdevant v. Wilber, 464 F. Supp. 327 (E.D. Wis. 1979). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(e). “The Menominee Restoration Committee shall represent the Menominee people in the implementation of this Act and shall have no powers other than those given to it in accordance with this Act.”
Grand Traverse Band v. Off. of the U.S. Attorney for W. Dist., 369 F.3d 960 (6th Cir. 2004). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(a). *970 Congress also reversed its legislative terminations of three other tribes by providing that federal recognition was “extended or confirmed” to those tribes.”
United States v. Long, 183 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (E.D. Wis. 2002). “The Termination Act did not suspend or modify the tribe’s sovereign status but effected a “termination” of it. 25 U.S.C. § 891 (1954). And the Restoration Act, unlike the 1990 amendments to the ICRA, 25 U.”
United States v. Long, Frank (7th Cir. 2003). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(b) (“[T]here are here- by reinstated all rights and privileges of the tribe or its members under Federal treaty, statute, or otherwise.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 903a(a) — 1 case
Grand Traverse Band v. Off. of the U.S. Attorney for W. Dist., 369 F.3d 960 (6th Cir. 2004). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(a). *970 Congress also reversed its legislative terminations of three other tribes by providing that federal recognition was “extended or confirmed” to those tribes.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 903a(b) — 4 cases
United States v. Frank Long, 324 F.3d 475 (7th Cir. 2003). “The Menominee Restoration Act, for its part, makes clear that Congress intended to eliminate termination as a policy and practice and to restore the Menominee Tribe to its pre-“termination” status, 25 U.S.C. § 903a(b) (“[T]here are hereby reinstated all rights and privileges of…”
John Mark Latender v. Thomas Israel, Warden, 584 F.2d 817 (7th Cir. 1978). “The provisions pertinent here are paragraphs (b) and (c) of § 3, 25 U.S.C. §§ 903a(b) and (c): (b) The Act of June 17, 1954 ( 68 Stat.”
United States v. Long, 183 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (E.D. Wis. 2002). “The Termination Act did not suspend or modify the tribe’s sovereign status but effected a “termination” of it. 25 U.S.C. § 891 (1954). And the Restoration Act, unlike the 1990 amendments to the ICRA, 25 U.”
United States v. Long, Frank (7th Cir. 2003). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(b) (“[T]here are here- by reinstated all rights and privileges of the tribe or its members under Federal treaty, statute, or otherwise.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 903a(d) — 1 case
Webster v. Wisconsin Dep't of Revenue, 306 N.W.2d 701 (Wis. Ct. App. 1981). “34 The taxpayers admit that the use of the word “levy” in 25 U.S.C. §903a(d) is ambiguous and requires construction.”
— 25 U.S.C. § 903a(e) — 2 cases
Sturdevant v. Wilber, 464 F. Supp. 327 (E.D. Wis. 1979). “25 U.S.C. § 903a(e). “The Menominee Restoration Committee shall represent the Menominee people in the implementation of this Act and shall have no powers other than those given to it in accordance with this Act.”
United States v. Long, 183 F. Supp. 2d 1106 (E.D. Wis. 2002). “The Termination Act did not suspend or modify the tribe’s sovereign status but effected a “termination” of it. 25 U.S.C. § 891 (1954). And the Restoration Act, unlike the 1990 amendments to the ICRA, 25 U.”
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.