Montana v. United States

Montana v. United States
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued December 3, 1980
Decided March 24, 1981
Full case nameMontana, et al. v. United States, et al.
Citations450 U.S. 544 (more)
101 S. Ct. 1245; 67 L. Ed. 2d 493; 1981 U.S. LEXIS 9; 49 U.S.L.W. 4296
Case history
Prior457 F. Supp. 599 (D. Mont. 1978); reversed, 604 F.2d 1162 (9th Cir. 1979); cert. granted, 445 U.S. 960 (1980).
Holding
Indian tribes generally do not possess the power to regulate the activities of non-Indians even if those activities occur on Indian lands.
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr. · Potter Stewart
Byron White · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityStewart, joined by Burger, White, Powell, Rehnquist, Stevens
ConcurrenceStevens
DissentBlackmun, joined by Brennan, Marshall
Laws applied
Crow treaties, 18 U.S.C. § 1165

Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981), was a Supreme Court case that addressed two issues: (1) Whether the title of the Big Horn Riverbed rested with the United States, in trust for the Crow Tribe or passed to the State of Montana upon becoming a state and (2) Whether Crow Tribe retained the power to regulate hunting and fishing on tribal lands owned in fee-simple by a non-tribal member.[1] First, the Court held that Montana held title to the Big Horn Riverbed because the Equal Footing Doctrine required the United States to pass title to the newly incorporated State.[2] Second, the Court held that Crow Tribe lacked the power to regulate nonmember hunting and fishing on fee-simple land owned by nonmembers, but within the bounds of its reservation. More broadly, the Court held that Tribes could not exercise regulatory authority over nonmembers on fee-simple land within the reservation unless (1) the nonmember entered a "consensual relationship" with the Tribe or its members[3] or (2) the nonmember's "conduct threatens or has some direct effect on the political integrity, the economic security, or the health or welfare of the tribe."[4]

The Supreme Court in Montana v. United States set a precedent which resulted in a wave of litigation challenging not only the exercise of tribal court authority over non-members, but the very existence of that authority.[5]

  1. ^ Montana v. United States, 450 U.S. 544 (1981). Public domain This article incorporates public domain material from this U.S government document.
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference :0 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference :2 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Duthu (2008), p. 38