Tribal contract funding cap
Salazar v. Ramah Navajo Chapter
In brief
The tribes won: the federal government must pay their full contract-support costs, even above the cap.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided 5-4 · June 18, 2012 · Opinion by Justice Sotomayor
- What it’s about
- The Supreme Court agreed with the Tenth Circuit that the federal government must pay tribes’ full contract-support costs under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, even when the total amount due exceeds the statutory funding cap.
- Who it affects
- The ruling requires the federal government to cover each Tribe’s full contract-support costs, even when they exceed the funding cap.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The law sets a cap on federal funds available for tribes’ contract-support costs.
Question presented
Under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act, is the government required to pay all of the contract support costs incurred by a tribal contractor, as mandated by the Act, if payment of those costs would exceed the express statutory cap on the appropriations available to pay such costs?
What the Court decided
Holding
The Government must pay each Tribe’s contract support costs in full. Pp. 5 − 18. 644 F. 3d 1054, affirmed.
- Result
- Affirmed
The vote
From the opinions
“Today the Court concludes that the Federal Government must pay the full amount of contract support costs incurred by the respondent Tribes, regardless of whether there are any appropriated funds left for that purpose.”
What's next
The federal government must carry out the ruling by paying each Tribe’s full contract-support costs.
Documents
Opinions
Audio
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Impact Analysis
AI analysis generated: Opinion Summary
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
Show 5 moreShow fewer
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Audio Recording added: Oral Arguments - Salazar
Opinion added: Salazar
More questions
- What did Chief Justice Roberts object to?
- He said payments depended on available federal funds, the law set a total cap, and the government did not have to cut one Tribe’s program funding to pay another.
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.