Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-543_3e04.pdf
Page Number: 16

Cite as:  594 U. S. ____ (2021) 

13 

Opinion of the Court 

ISDA-reminiscent phrasing not as a synonym for termina-
tion but to describe just one, among other, consequences of 
a tribe’s constitution being revoked.  See, e.g., ibid.  (“The 
constitution of the tribe . . . shall be revoked by the Secre-
tary.  Thereafter,  the  tribe  and  its  members  shall  not  be 
entitled  to  any  of  the  special  services  performed  by  the 
United  States  for  Indians  because of  their  status  as  Indi-
ans, all statutes of the United States that affect Indians be-
cause  of  their  status  as  Indians  shall  be  inapplicable  to 
them, and the laws of the several States shall apply to them 
in the same manner they apply to other persons or citizens
within their jurisdiction”).

Some linguistic similarity between ISDA and the termi-
nation statutes does not suggest that the language of the 
recognized-as-eligible clause was an accepted way of saying 
“a federally recognized tribe” in 1975.  It instead supports a 
much more limited proposition: A federally recognized tribe 
that  has  not  been  terminated  is  “entitled”  to  “special  ser-
vices  performed  by  the  United  States  for  Indians,”  and
thereby  satisfies  ISDA’s  similarly  worded  recognized-as-
eligible clause.  But of course, no one disputes that being a
federally recognized tribe is one way to qualify as an Indian 
tribe under ISDA; it is just not the only way.

Nor is the mere inclusion of the word “recognized” enough
to give the recognized-as-eligible clause a term-of-art mean-
ing.  True, the word “recognized” often refers to a tribe with 
which the United States has a government-to-government
relationship  (particularly  when  it  is  sandwiched  between
the  words  “federally”  and  “tribe”).    That  does  not  mean, 
however, that the word “recognized” always connotes polit-
ical recognition.4 

—————— 

4 Indeed, “recognition” is not even the sole term used to describe tribes
with  which  the  United  States  maintains  a  government-to-government
relationship;  “acknowledgement”  is  often  used  for  that  same  purpose.
See 1 F. Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law §3.02[3] (N. Newton
ed. 2012) (“Federal acknowledgement or recognition of an Indian group’s