Hodel v. Irving (1986)
- Docket
- 85-637
- Decided
- 1986-01-01
Summary
Question: Is the provision of the Indian Land Consolidation Act which would take Indians' fractional interest in land and convey those interests to the control of the tribal government an unconstitutional taking? Conclusion: Yes. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor delivered the opinion of the Court affirming the appellate court's decision. The Court held that the section of the Indian Land Consolidation Act which transferred ownership of fractional land interests to the respective tribe constituted an unconstitutional seizure of property without just compensation. The Court also held that the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the provision. Justice William J. Brennan filed a concurring opinion in which Justices Thurgood Marshall and Harry Blackmun joined. Justice Brennan emphasized that the ruling would not limit the Court's opinion in Andrus v. Allard , and that the property rights and expectations specific to this case made this case unusual. Justice Antonin Scalia filed a concurring opinion in which Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Lewis F. Powell joined. He stated that the Court's decision effectively limited Andrus v. Allard to its facts. Justice John Paul Stevens filed an opinion concurring in the judgment in which Justice Byron White joined. He stated that Congress had failed to afford the affected Native Americans due process by failing to provide any opportunity to order their affairs in light of the new law.