Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ketchikan Gateway Borough v. Ketchikan Indian Corp.

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided August 15, 2003No. S-10332Published

1DissentFabe, Chief Justice

I disagree with the court's conclusion that the uncommitted space in KIC's building is not exempt from borough taxes. In my view, KIC has presented a sufficiently strong federal and tribal interest to allow extension of its tax exemption to temporarily unused spaces.

As the court's opinion recognizes, the United States Supreme Court held in Ramah that questions of implied federal preemption in Indian tax cases require "a particularized examination of the relevant state, federal, and tribal interests."1 Informing the preemption analysis are "the traditional notions of tribal sovereignty, and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. BrackerSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  2. Cotton Petroleum Corp. v. New MexicoSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  3. Ramah Navajo School Bd., Inc. v. Bureau of Revenue of NMSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. District of Columbia v. Catholic University of AmericaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1979
  5. Board of Equalization v. Alaska Native Brotherhood & Sisterhood, Camp No. 14Alaska Supreme Court · 1983

3 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