Opinion ID: 780220
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Purpose of the Legislation

Text: 26 The third Cort question for us to answer is whether it would be consistent with the underlying legislative purpose of § 450e to imply a private right of action. The answer to that question likewise weighs in favor of a holding that there is no such right. 27 As discussed above, Congress' stated purpose in enacting the ISDEAA was to increase Indian tribal autonomy in running federally administered programs. See Dawavendewa v. Salt River Project Agric. Improvement & Power Dist., 154 F.3d 1117, 1122 (9th Cir.1998) (stating that the purpose of the ISDEAA is to promote Indian participation in the administration of federal programs). But subjecting an Indian organization to an individual action for damages for every decision to hire a non-Indian for a particular position would undermine the Indian organization's autonomy, not enhance it. 28 We are mindful that the text of § 450e(b) is broad enough to cover contractors or grant recipients who are not Indians. It applies to contracts and grants not only with Indian organizations but also contracts and grants  for the benefit of Indians. 25 U.S.C. § 450e(b) (emphasis added). For that reason, not all potential defendants would be Indian organizations. When the defendant is non-Indian, a private right of action would not conflict with the statutory purpose of promoting tribal self-governance. However, many — if not most — of the agreements subject to § 450e involve a contractor or grant recipient that is an Indian organization. Congress manifestly thought so, because it referred first to contracts and grants with Indian organizations. Additionally, self-determination contracts, the primary type of contract governed by the Act, are by definition contracts with tribal organizations. 25 U.S.C. § 450b(j). Consequently, the third Cort factor disfavors the implication of a private right of action under § 450e. 29 Plaintiff argues, correctly, that Indian tribal autonomy is not the sole purpose of the ISDEAA. Another purpose is to increase the participation of individual Indians in federally run programs. See 25 U.S.C. § 450a(a) (recognizing the obligation of the United States to respond to the strong expression of the Indian people for self-determination by assuring maximum Indian participation in the direction of ... Federal services to Indian communities so as to render such services more responsive to the needs and desires of those communities). Although it is true that permitting an individual claim to enforce the Indian employment preference might serve to ensure that greater numbers of Indians are employed, the Supreme Court has instructed that, [w]here Congress seeks to promote dual objectives in a single statute, courts must be more than usually hesitant to infer from its silence a cause of action that, while serving one legislative purpose, will disserve the other. Santa Clara Pueblo, 436 U.S. at 64, 98 S.Ct. 1670. This is just such a situation.