October Term 2011 · Docket 11-551

Can the Interior Secretary withhold tribal funds to enforce spending caps?

The Ramah Navajo Chapter claims the Interior Secretary illegally withheld funds. The Secretary argues the law requires him to enforce spending limits.

Official caption
Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
  2. — 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.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    Mr. Freeman argued the funding dispute stems from two distinctive features of the ISDA scheme.

    Mr. Phillips argued the Ferris doctrine is the fundamental issue in this case.

    Justice Sotomayor stated she did not think the Federal Circuit was right about the appropriation.

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The Ramah Navajo Chapter wants the court to order the Interior Secretary to pay withheld funds. The Secretary wants the court to confirm his power to withhold funds to enforce statutory caps.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 18, 2012.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The Ramah Navajo Chapter wants the court to order the Secretary to pay the withheld funds.

The Secretary wants the court to confirm his authority to withhold funds to enforce caps.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The Ramah Navajo Chapter argues the Secretary must pay all approved tribal funds.

The Secretary argues the law requires him to withhold funds to enforce spending limits.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Scalia asked why the same statutory language means different things in different acts.

Justice Sotomayor asked if the Secretary could have acted differently regarding the payments.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the Secretary's power to withhold tribal funds. It determines how the government enforces spending caps on tribal programs.

Official sources for this section

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 Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON