Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): accordingly consider materials “outside the pleadings” to the extent those materials are necessary to determine whether it has subject matter jurisdiction over the claims asserted against the Community Defendants. B. Sovereign Immunity The doctrine of tribal sovereign immunity is well established. Indian tribes have long been recognized as possessing the common-law immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers. Santa Clara Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58, 98 S.Ct. 1670, 1677, 56 L.Ed.2d 106 (1978); Rupp v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 45 F.3d 1241, 1244 (8th Cir.1995); Weeks Constr., Inc. v. Oglala Sioux Housing Auth.., 797 F.2d 668, 670 (8th Cir.1986); see also Three Affiliated Tribes v. Wold Engineering, P.C., 476 U.S. 877, 890, 106 S.Ct. 2305, 2313, 90 L.Ed.2d 881 (1986) (<HOLDING>). This immunity from suit is based on the view 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that florida does not have jurisdiction in a suit by other persons against an indian tribe absent express waiver of tribal sovereign immunity (B) recognizing that the common law sovereign immunity possessed by the tribe is a necessary corollary to indian sovereignty and selfgovernance (C) holding that an indian tribe is subject to suit only where congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity (D) holding that as a matter of federal law an indian tribe is subject to suit only where congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity (E) recognizing that tribal sovereign immunity extends to agencies and subdivisions of the tribe
Output (English): holding that as a matter of federal law an indian tribe is subject to suit only where congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity