White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker facts for kids
Quick facts for kids White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker |
|
|---|---|
|
|
| Argued January 14, 1980 Decided June 27, 1980 |
|
| Full case name | White Mountain Apache Tribe, et al. v. Bracker, et al. |
| Citations | 448 U.S. 136 (more)
100 S. Ct. 2578; 65 L. Ed. 2d 665; 1980 U.S. LEXIS 52
|
| Prior history | White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 585 P.2d 891 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1978); cert. granted, 444 U.S. 823 (1979). |
| Holding | |
| Arizona's taxes that were assessed against a non-Indian contractor that was working exclusively for an Indian tribe on that tribe's reservation were preempted by federal law | |
| Court membership | |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Marshall, joined by Burger, Brennan, White, Blackmun, Powell |
| Concurrence | Powell |
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Stewart, Rehnquist |
| Laws applied | |
| U.S. Const. art. 1, §8, cl. 3; 4 U.S.C. § 104; 4 U.S.C. § 105, et seq. | |
White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker was an important case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1980. The Court ruled that the state of Arizona could not collect certain taxes from a company working only for the White Mountain Apache Tribe on their reservation. This was because federal laws already covered these activities, meaning the state's taxes were "preempted" or overridden by federal rules.
Contents
Understanding the Case
This case was about who has the power to tax businesses working on Native American reservations. It looked at the balance between state, federal, and tribal powers.
What Happened?
The White Mountain Apache Tribe created a business called the Fort Apache Timber Company (FATCO). In 1969, FATCO hired a company called Pinetop Logging Company (Pinetop). Pinetop's job was to transport and sell lumber. This lumber came from trees harvested by FATCO on the Fort Apache Indian Reservation.
The land where the trees grew was held in trust by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA). The BIA is a U.S. government agency. The BIA had a contract with FATCO to harvest trees. The BIA also controlled many details of the logging. This included which trees to cut and what equipment to use. They even decided which roads to use and how fast logging trucks could drive.
Pinetop's trucks never left the reservation. They only used roads built and kept up by the BIA. In 1971, the state of Arizona tried to collect two types of taxes from Pinetop. These were a motor carrier tax and a fuel tax. Pinetop paid the taxes but protested, saying they shouldn't have to pay.
The Courts Before the Supreme Court
Both Pinetop and the White Mountain Apache Tribe sued Arizona to get the taxes back. The first court, the Superior Court in Maricopa County, Arizona, sided with the state. The tribe and Pinetop then appealed this decision.
At the Arizona Court of Appeals, Pinetop argued that a previous Supreme Court case, McClanahan v. Arizona State Tax Commission, meant Arizona could not tax them. Arizona argued that Pinetop was not owned by the tribe or by Native Americans, so the tax should apply. The appeals court agreed with Arizona.
The tribe and Pinetop tried to appeal again to the Arizona Supreme Court, but that court chose not to hear the case. Finally, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to review the case. This meant they would make the final decision.
The Supreme Court's Decision
Justice Thurgood Marshall wrote the main opinion for the Supreme Court. He explained that when a state tries to tax a non-Native American company working on a reservation, the Court must look at all the interests involved. This includes the state's, the federal government's, and the tribe's interests.
Justice Marshall pointed out that the federal government, through the BIA, heavily controlled the logging operation. This control was so complete that it left no room for Arizona to add its own taxes. The Court decided that federal law "preempted" (overrode) Arizona's taxes. Because of this, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Arizona Court of Appeals. This meant Pinetop did not have to pay the taxes.
Why Some Justices Agreed
Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr. agreed with the main decision. He added that the roads Pinetop used were built and maintained by the BIA or the tribe. He felt that if Arizona taxed Pinetop for using these roads, it would be like "double taxation." The state would be collecting money for roads it didn't maintain.
Why Some Justices Disagreed
Justice John Paul Stevens disagreed with the majority. Justices Potter Stewart and William Rehnquist joined him in his dissent. Justice Stevens believed that Arizona should be able to tax Pinetop. He thought it didn't matter if those taxes might eventually affect the tribe. He would have allowed Arizona to collect the taxes.
