Interior’s Carcieri Opinion Means More Diligence for Trust Land Development Projects

by Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
Contact

The Office of the Solicitor of the Department of the Interior has issued a legal opinion (the “Opinion“) to the Secretary of the Interior interpreting the statutory phrase “under federal jurisdiction” in the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq. (1934), (the “IRA“).[1]  The Opinion is a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009) (hereinafter, “Carcieri”), which limited Secretarial authority to take land into trust for tribes to those tribes “under federal jurisdiction” in 1934. The Opinion advises the Department of the Interior (“Interior“) that a tribe may be considered “under federal jurisdiction” in 1934 if it can show:

(1) there is a sufficient showing in the tribe’s history, at or before 1934, that it was under federal jurisdiction, i.e. whether the United States had in 1934 or at some point in the tribe’s history prior to 1934, taken an action or series of actions through a course of dealings or other relevants acts for or on behalf of the tribe, or in some instance tribal members, that are sufficient to establish or that generally reflect federal obligations, duties, responsibility for or authority over the tribe by the United States; and if so,

(2) the tribe’s jurisdictional status remained intact in 1934.

Notably, the Opinion states that a tribe need not have been both under federal jurisdiction in 1934 and federally recognized in 1934 to be eligible to have land taken into trust on its behalf.

DISCUSSION

Background on the Carcieri Case

In the Carcieri decision, the Supreme Court held that the Secretary of the Interior (“Secretary“) did not have the authority to take land into trust for the Narragansett Indian Tribe of Rhode Island (“Narragansett Tribe“) under Section 5 of the IRA because the Narragansett Tribe was not “under federal jurisdiction” at the time the IRA was enacted in 1934.  The Supreme Court’s decision in Carcieri was based on the interpretation of two provisions of the IRA – the definition of “Indian” in Section 19 of the IRA and the authority of the Secretary to take land into trust under Section 5 of the IRA.  The Supreme Court interpreted the definition of the term “Indian” in Section 19 of the IRA to constrain the Secretary’s authority to take land into trust for Indians under Section 5 of the IRA.  The Court concluded that the Secretary only has the authority to take land into trust for Indian tribes that were “under federal jurisdiction” in 1934.

The Carcieri decision did not determine what would be necessary for a tribe to demonstrate that it was under federal jurisdiction in 1934.  Since the decision, Interior, with the Office of the Solicitor, developed a similar two-part inquiry, first used in a trust acquisition involving the Cowlitz Tribe of Washington in 2011, to interpret the phrase “under federal jurisdiction”.  The Solicitor’s opinion made public on March 12, 2014, is Interior’s first formal guidance on how the agency will interpret the phrase “under federal jurisdiction” when making its trust land determinations.

Carcieri Test: Step 1

As noted above, the Opinion sets forth the following tribal specific two-part test for interpreting the phrase “under federal jurisdiction”:  (1) is there a sufficient showing in the tribe’s history, at or before 1934, that the tribe was under federal jurisdiction; and if so, (2) did the tribe’s federal jurisdictional status remain intact as of 1934.  In applying these inquiries, the Opinion indicates that to establish a “sufficient showing” the tribe was under federal jurisdiction, it will need some evidence or indicia that the United States exercised federal jurisdiction over the tribe at or before 1934.

Application of the first prong of the test will be fact and tribal specific and will require an analysis of the historic course of dealing between the federal government and a tribe.  Examples of such evidence include, but are not limited to: (a) treaty-making with tribes, (b) contract approval for tribes or Indians, (c) enforcement of federal legislation applicable to tribes, such as enforcement of the Trade and Intercourse Acts, (d) education of Indian students, (e) provision of health or social services to a tribe, (f) administration of services by the Office of Indian Affairs with respect to a tribe and (g) adoption or rejection by the tribe of the IRA.  In short, the tribe will need to demonstrate that at some point in its history either through one clear action by the federal government or through a series of actions or inactions by the federal government, the tribe was under federal jurisdiction.

Carcieri Test: Step 2

Once the tribe has shown that the tribe was, at or prior to 1934, under federal jurisdiction, the tribe will then need to show that its federal jurisdictional status remained “intact” in 1934.  In considering the second prong of the test, the Opinion indicates that the Department of Interior may explore a universe of actions and inactions to ascertain whether such status remained in 1934.  Significantly, in applying the second prong of the test, the Department of the Interior can look at both actions by the federal government and “inaction” by the federal government.  For example, in some circumstances, the failure by the federal government to take any actions with respect to a tribe during a specified period does not necessarily reflect a termination of such tribe’s jurisdictional status.  Further, even the federal government’s dormant exercise of federal jurisdiction over a tribe may be considered sufficient for such jurisdiction to remain intact.

The Opinion also provides that in some circumstances, evidence of the tribe being under federal jurisdiction will be so clear and unambiguous Interior will not need to further examine the tribe’s history prior to 1934, nor will Interior have to further inquire as to whether such federal jurisdiction remained “intact.”  An example of such clear evidence is if a tribe voted to adopt or opt out of the IRA.  Such clear evidence “conclusively establishes that the United States understood that the particular tribe was under federal jurisdiction in 1934.”[2]

Finally, the Opinion clarifies that the relevant inquiry for Interior when taking land into trust is whether a tribe was considered to be “under federal jurisdiction in 1934.”  The tribe does not have to prove that it was both “federally recognized in 1934” and “under federal jurisdiction in 1934.”  It simply has to prove that it was “under federal jurisdiction in 1934” and that it is a federally recognized Indian tribe at the time the Secretary makes the trust land acquisition for the tribe.

Practical Implications of the Opinion

As noted above, Interior had developed a two-part inquiry following the Carcieri decision and used it in the Cowlitz Tribe’s acquisition in 2011.  The Cowlitz acquisition was challenged in federal district court, and the proceedings have not yet culminated in any judicial review of the application of the test to Cowlitz.  Thus, the Solicitor’s opinion does not signal a marked shift in Interior’s approach to trust land acquisitions but rather sets out the formal, legal reasoning and rationale for its two-part inquiry and provides tribes with examples of how the inquiry might be satisfied.  Tribes now have formal guidance, and Interior now has additional support for its statutory interpretation.

The Opinion can be expected to have the most impact on tribes that were formally recognized by the United States after 1934 and are seeking trust land acquisitions.  As a result of the Carcieri decision, such tribes now must make additional showings to Interior to satisfy the two-part test now set forth in the Opinion.  This may be expected to add some time and cost to trust acquisitions, as the test is very tribal and fact specific and may in some instances require expert historical research and legal analysis by the tribe.  Additionally for parties contracting or lending to recently recognized Indian tribes who are developing projects on tribal trust lands, such third parties will need to ensure that complete and thorough diligence is performed in connection with the Carcieri decision.

Written by:

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
Contact
more
less

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.