Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Blackfeet Tribe of Indians v. State of Montana, Director of the Montana Department of Revenue, Glacier County, Montana, and Pondera County, Montana

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided April 3, 1984No. 81-3041Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJ. Blaine Anderson, Circuit Judge

I concur, but with additional reasons, in the majority’s holding that the 1938 Act did not impliedly repeal the 1924 Act. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s view that the 1924 Act’s taxing authorization is inapplicable to leases entered into after promulgation of the 1938 Act.

My disagreement has three bases. First, the majority misapplies well-established rules of statutory construction by stating that the issue is whether the 1938 Act “expressly incorporated” the 1924 Act’s taxing authorization. Majority Opinion at 13. Once having concluded that the 1924 Act is still in…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Morton v. MancariSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. Red Lion Broadcasting Co. v. Federal Communications CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Regional Rail Reorganization Act CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  4. Watt v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Radzanower v. Touche Ross & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API