FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
Abstract
In 1998, FMC Corporation agreed to submit to the Shoshone-Bannock Tribes’ permitting processes, including the payment of fees, for clean-up work required as part of consent decree negotiations with the Environmental Protection Agency. Then, in 2002, FMC refused to pay the Tribes under a permitting agreement entered into by both parties, even though the company continued to store hazardous waste on land within the Shoshone-Bannock Fort Hall Reservation in Idaho. FMC challenged the Tribes’ authority to enforce the $1.5 million permitting fees first in tribal court and later challenged the Tribes’ authority to exercise civil regulatory and adjudicatory jurisdiction over the non-Indian corporation in federal court. FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes demonstrates the complexities and fraught nature of tribal civil jurisdiction- text
- FMC Corp. v. Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
- FMC Corp.
- Shoshone-Bannock Tribes
- Shoshone-Bannock
- federal Indian law
- tribes
- Indian tribe
- Indian
- tribe
- Environmental Protection Agency
- EPA
- Montana v. United States
- Montana exception
- consent
- health
- safety
- welfare
- existential threat to the health
- safety
- and welfare of a tribe
- political integrity
- first Montana exception
- second Montana exception
- district court
- ninth circuit
- Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
- Supreme Court
- United States Supreme Court
- declaratory judgement
- CERCLA
- consent decree
- RCRA
- Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liabilities Act
- Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
- RCRA
- FMC
- permit
- permits
- permitting
- permitting process
- clean-up permit
- permitting fee
- permitting fees
- tribal jurisdiction
- tribal civil jurisdiction
- tribal civil regulatory jurisdiction
- tribal civil adjudicatory jurisdiction
- regulatory jurisdiction
- adjudicatory jurisdiction
- jurisdiction over non-Indian entities
- jurisdiction over non-Indians
- waste ponds
- fine
- negotiation
- stored waste
- hazardous waste
- radioactive waste
- containment program
- harm
- impose substantial fees
- toxic
- off-site
- tribal permits
- tribal ordinance
- Secretary of the Interior
- Indian Country
- within the boundaries of the Reservation
- Indian Reservation
- Reservation
- waste pond
- political integrity
- economic security
- health or welfare of the tribes
- catastrophic
- remedial actions
- annual fee
- Plains Commerce
- Plains Commerce Bank
- Strate v. A 1 Contractors
- Strate
- Nevada v. Hicks
- due process
- nonmembers
- tribal criminal jurisdiction over non-Indians
- Plains Commerce Bank v. Long Family Land & Cattle Co.
- Dollar General
- Dolgencorp
- Inc. v. Mississippi Band of Chactaw Indians
- Writ of certiorari
- en banc petition
- harm catastrophic for tribal self-governance
- Montana analysis
- Administrative Law
- Business Organizations Law
- Civil Law
- Civil Procedure
- Common Law
- Constitutional Law
- Consumer Protection Law
- Contracts
- Courts
- Cultural Heritage Law
- Energy and Utilities Law
- Environmental Law
- Government Contracts
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law
- Judges
- Jurisdiction
- Jurisprudence
- Land Use Law
- Law and Economics
- Law and Race
- Law and Society
- Legal History
- Legal Remedies
- Legal Writing and Research
- Litigation
- Natural Resources Law
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law
- Organizations Law
- President/Executive Department
- Science and Technology Law
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Water Law