October Term 2010 · Docket 10-382
Must the government share legal advice with tribes it manages?
The Jicarilla Apache Nation seeks legal advice from the government. The government claims privilege blocks that disclosure.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Shah argued the Federal Circuit wrongly abrogated privilege.
Mr. Gordon argued no trustee can withhold advice about beneficiary money.
questions_detail
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The dispute centers on attorney-client privilege. The tribe wants access to legal advice. The government wants to keep that advice secret.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 20, 2011.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
What each side wants
The government wants to keep legal advice secret.
The tribe wants to see the government's legal advice.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
What each side says
The government argues common law trust principles do not apply.
The tribe argues the government acts as a fiduciary trustee.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked if a trustee can breach duty by ignoring care.
Justice Sotomayor asked why privilege protects advice about required investments.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
Why it matters
This case defines the scope of government transparency. It determines whether tribes can audit their managers. It affects how federal agencies handle tribal trust funds.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 3-7 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 3-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 47-17 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 47-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 11-29 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 11-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 33-37 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 33-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 14, lines 47-5 — Transcript, file page 14, lines 47-5
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-17 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 33-17 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 33-17
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 51-11 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 51-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 45-7 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 45-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 24, lines 39-7 — Transcript, file page 24, lines 39-7
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 19-31 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 19-31
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.