Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin episode artwork

EPISODE · Aug 5, 2024 · 43 MIN

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin

from Supreme Court Opinions · host SCOTUS Opinions

Welcome to Supreme Court Opinions. In this episode, you’ll hear the Court’s opinion in Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v Coughlin. In this case, the court considered this issue: Does the Bankruptcy Code unequivocally abrogate tribal sovereign immunity? The case was decided on June 15, 2023.  The Supreme Court held that The Bankruptcy Code unequivocally abrogates the sovereign immunity of all governments, including federally recognized Indian tribes. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson authored the majority opinion of the Court. To abrogate sovereign immunity, Congress must make its intent to abrogate “unmistakably clear in the language of the statute.” The statute at issue here contains such unmistakably clear language. First, 11 U.S.C. § 106(a) expressly abrogates the sovereign immunity of “governmental units” for certain enumerated purposes. Section 101(27), defines “governmental unit” as “United States; State; Commonwealth; District; Territory; municipality; foreign state; department, agency, or instrumentality of the United States . . . , a State, a Commonwealth, a District, a Territory, a municipality, or a foreign state; or other foreign or domestic government.” This definition “exudes comprehensiveness from beginning to end,” and other provisions of the Bankruptcy Code support this understanding as well. Federally recognized tribes are “indisputably” governments, so the § 106(a) unequivocally abrogates their sovereign immunity. Justice Clarence Thomas authored an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Thomas reiterated an argument he has made before that to the extent that tribes possess sovereign immunity at all, that immunity does not extend to “suits arising out of a tribe’s commercial activities conducted beyond its territory.” Justice Neil Gorsuch authored a dissenting opinion arguing that the Court’s clear-statement rule requires the statute to expressly mention Indian tribes in order to abrogate their sovereign immunity. Because the Bankruptcy Code does not, he would hold that it does not abrogate federally recognized Indian tribes’ sovereign immunity. The opinion is presented here in its entirety, but with citations omitted. If you appreciate this episode, please subscribe. Thank you. 

Episode metadata supplied by the publisher feed · Published Aug 5, 2024

Embed this episode

NOW PLAYING

Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Coughlin

0:00 43:42

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

No similar episodes found.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of Supreme Court Opinions?

This episode is 43 minutes long.

When was this Supreme Court Opinions episode published?

This episode was published on August 5, 2024.

Can I download this Supreme Court Opinions episode?

Yes. Use the download control on the episode player to save the publisher-provided media file.
URL copied to clipboard!