Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/20pdf/20-543_3e04.pdf
Page Number: 38

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

7 

GORSUCH, J., dissenting 

Indians.    1  Cohen,  Handbook  of  Federal  Indian  Law 
§3.02[3], at 134. 
  There  is  more  evidence  too.    When  Congress  passed 
ISDA, it sought to provide Indians “meaningful leadership 
roles”  that  are  “crucial  to  the  realization  of  self- 
government.”  25 U. S. C. §5301.  Accordingly, “tribes may 
enter into ‘self-determination contracts’ with federal agen-
cies  to  take  control  of  a  variety  of  federally  funded  pro-
grams.”  Menominee Tribe of Wis. v. United States, 577 U. S. 
250, 252 (2016); see also §5321.  Handing over federal gov-
ernment programs to tribal governments in order to facili-
tate self-government is precisely the sort of government-to-
government  activity  that  aligns  with  formal  recognition.  
See  also  §§5384,  5385  (reflecting  later  amendments  to 
ISDA)  (instructing  the  Secretary  to  enter  compacts  and 
funding  agreements  “with  each  Indian  tribe  participating 
in self-governance in a manner consistent with the Federal 
Government’s  trust  responsibility,  treaty  obligations,  and 
the  government-to-government  relationship  between  In-
dian tribes and the United States”). 
  The  CARES  Act  itself  offers  still  further  clues.    In  the 
provision at issue before us, Congress appropriated money 
“for making payments to States, Tribal governments, and 
units of local government.”  42 U. S. C. §801(a)(1).  Includ-
ing  tribal  governments  side-by-side  with  States  and  local 
governments  reinforces  the  conclusion  that  Congress  was 
speaking  of  government  entities  capable  of  having  a  
government-to-government  relationship  with  the  United 
States.  Recall, as well, that the CARES Act defines tribal 
governments  as  the  “recognized  governing  body  of  an  In-
dian Tribe.”  §801(g)(5).  ANCs, like most corporations, have 
a board of directors, 43 U. S. C. §1606(f ), and a corporate 
board may well be the governing body of an enterprise.  But 
they do not govern any people or direct any government.