Legal Opinion
FMC v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided June 18, 1990No. 89-35349PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FARRIS, Circuit Judge:
This case presents the question of the extent of power Indian tribes have over non-Indians acting on fee land located within the confines of a reservation. The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes are attempting to enforce a Tribal Employment Rights Ordinance, which requires all employers working on the reservation to give mandatory preferences in hiring to Indians. FMC, a non-Indian business operating on fee land inside the Reservation, challenges the Tribes’ power to enforce the ordinance. The district court held that the Tribes did not have jurisdiction over FMC, reversing the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. Winston Bryant McConneyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Santa Clara Pueblo v. MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- National Farmers Union Insurance v. Crow Tribe of IndiansSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Babbitt Ford, Inc. v. Navajo Indian TribeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1983
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Yellowstone County, a Political Subdivision of the State of Montana v. Carl PeaseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- United States of America Ex Rel. Morongo Band of Mission Indians v. Frank RoseCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Fmc v. Shoshone-Bannock TribesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Duncan Energy Co. v. Three Affiliated Tribes of the Fort Berthold ReservationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
- James R. Smith v. Salish Kootenai College Court of Appeals of the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead ReservationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2004
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.