October Term 2022 · Docket 22-227

Does the Bankruptcy Code strip Indian tribes of sovereign immunity?

The Lac du Flambeau Band seeks to keep its immunity from bankruptcy damages claims. The opposing side argues the statute removes that protection.

Official caption
Lac du Flambeau Band v. Coughlin
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. Shah argued the question is whether Congress abrogated tribal immunity in the Bankruptcy Code.

    Mr. Shah stated that reading the phrase to include tribes is not wholly unreasonable.

    Mr. Raynor argued the Code unequivocally abrogates the immunity of all governments, including tribes.

    Mr. Rapawy argued tribes are governments because they exercise governmental authority and functions.

    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 case tests whether federal bankruptcy law overrides the legal shield that protects Indian tribes from certain lawsuits.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 24, 2023.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

The Lac du Flambeau Band wants the Court to preserve its sovereign immunity from bankruptcy damages actions.

The opposing side wants the Court to rule that the Bankruptcy Code removes tribal sovereign immunity.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

The Band argues the statute does not clearly target Indian tribes for immunity removal.

The opposing side argues the phrase foreign or domestic government includes all governments, including tribes.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Thomas asked if Congress must explicitly name tribes to remove their immunity.

Justice Barrett asked if the phrase every government would abrogate state sovereign immunity.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This case defines the legal boundary between tribal sovereignty and federal bankruptcy law. It determines whether tribes face financial liability in bankruptcy proceedings. The outcome shapes the balance of power between tribal nations and federal courts.

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