City of Polson, Montana v. Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation, Montana

Background

A city and other non-Indian landowners challenged the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes’ authority over part of Flathead Lake and nearby riparian (lakeshore) rights. The Ninth Circuit ruled that the historic Flathead Reservation was not terminated, that the United States retained title to the southern half of Flathead Lake as trustee for the Tribes, and that the Tribes could regulate riparian rights of non-Indian landowners. The parties asked the Supreme Court to review that decision; the Court declined to do so.

Reasoning

The central question was whether the Supreme Court should take the case and reconsider the Ninth Circuit’s conclusions about ownership and regulatory power. Justice Rehnquist, joined by Justice White, dissented from the denial of review and explained why the Ninth Circuit might have misapplied earlier decisions about whether treaty language transferred lakebed ownership to the State of Montana and about tribal power over nonmembers. The dissent says those two issues raise substantial legal doubts that warrant the Court’s review, while the termination issue did not.

Real world impact

Because the Supreme Court declined to review, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling stands for now. That leaves in place the finding that the U.S. holds the southern lakebed in trust for the Tribes and the Tribes’ ordinance regulating riparian rights applies to non‑Indian owners. The opinion notes these questions have ramifications across many Western states and that a future Supreme Court decision could change the result.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Rehnquist’s dissent (joined by Justice White) is the key secondary view: he would have granted review on the ownership and regulatory questions, believing the Ninth Circuit may have misapplied prior Supreme Court decisions.