This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
The case concerns whether the federal government can terminate a reservation held in trust for the White Mountain Apache Tribe.
The United States argues that the trust over Fort Apache lands restrains alienation of the property and immunizes it from state taxation.
Only Congress has the power to terminate the reservation; the executive branch cannot terminate it.
Background and question before the Court
In 1960 Congress declared the former Fort Apache military post to be held in trust for the White Mountain Apache Tribe.
The Court stated that only Congress, not the executive branch, has the power to terminate this reservation.
What each side argues
United States (Petitioner)
According to United States, the vast majority of the buildings and historic district area of Fort Apache are used today for school and administrative purposes.
According to United States, when Congress places land in trust for Indians, it restrains alienation of the property and immunizes the property from State taxation.
White Mountain Apache Tribe (Respondent)
According to Respondent (Robert C. Brauchli), the Secretary of the Interior voluntarily took control of the buildings, distinguishing the trust from a bare trust.
According to Government, the government's liability ends when it relinquishes control of the buildings and the Tribe assumes responsibility for them.
What happened at oral argument
The oral argument began at 10:03 a.m. before the Supreme Court of the United States.
Justice O'Connor asked whether the trust allows the Government to use the property for school or administrative needs and whether there is something more than in Mitchell I.
Justice Kennedy asked whether the Government’s initial argument was that the Government possessed the buildings after 1960.
A Justice asked, “At its expense?”
A Justice asked whether the Government is responsible for waste or damage that occurred up to the point they ceased using the property or relinquished control.
A Justice asked whether the Government can terminate the trust at any time by executive order.
- [1] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 1
- [2] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 19
- [3] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 35
- [4] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 41
- [5] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 55
- [6] 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdf, p. 57
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- 4257590029d6682beb92-r1-befe6510142eccd3.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 19, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.