Queets Band of Indians v. The State of Washington, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. The State of Washington

dissenting:

The majority concludes that tribal ordinances providing for the licensing of tribal vehicles preempt the state’s authority to require state licenses and registration when the vehicles travel off reservation. I dissent because the state motor vehicle licensing scheme is nondiscriminatory and hence may be applied to tribal activities off reservation, including the operation of motor vehicles, absent Congressional action evincing a contrary intent.

The majority notes that “there is apparently no federal law which would require us to give broad federal preemptive effect to the Tribes’ ordinances.” However, it cites Crow Tribe of Indians v. Montana, 650 F.2d 1104, 1109 (9th Cir.1981), amended 665 F.2d 1390 , cert. denied, 459 U.S. 916 , 103 S.Ct. 230 , 74 L.Ed.2d 182 (1982), for the proposition that in the area of Indian preemption express federal statements are unnecessary. However, both Crow Tribe and the case it relied upon, White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 , 100 S.Ct. 2578 , 65 L.Ed.2d 665 (1980), involved state attempts to exert taxing authority over on reservation activities by non-Indians.

In White Mountain, the Court in a footnote to the…

We are asked to decide if the State of Washington’s refusal to grant licensing reciprocity to vehicles owned and licensed by two Indian tribes violates the federal Constitution. The district court permanently enjoined the state from enforcing its motor vehicle licensing and registration requirements on vehicles licensed and registered by the tribes, reasoning that each tribe was a “jurisdiction” as defined in Wash.Rev.Code § 46.85.020(2), for the purposes of reciprocal immunity from those requirements as provided in Wash.Rev. Code § 46.85.080.

We certified to the Washington Supreme Court the question of whether the state legislature intended to include Indian tribes as jurisdictions eligible for vehicle registration and licensing reciprocity. Queets Band of Indians v. State of Washington, 714 F.2d 1008 (9th Cir.1983). The Washington Supreme Court, in a divided opinion, concluded that the relevant statutes were not intended to include Indian *1402 tribes. Queets Band of Indians v. State, 102 Wash.2d 1 , 682 P.2d 909, 911-12 (1984). We are bound by the Washington Supreme Court’s interpretation of state law. See Wainwright v. Goode, 464 U.S. 78 , 104 S.Ct. 378, 382 , 78 L.Ed.2d 187…

765 F.2d 1399 QUEETS BAND OF INDIANS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. The STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendants-Appellants. MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. The STATE OF WASHINGTON, et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 83-3644, 83-3646. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 2, 1983. Withdrawn from Submission Sept. 2, 1983. Resubmitted July 24, 1984. Decided July 17, 1985. Michael P. O'Connell, Colville Confederated Tribes, Nespelem, Wash., for plaintiffs-appellees. Timothy R. Malone, Asst. Atty. Gen., Olympia, Wash., for defendants-appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Before WRIGHT, SKOPIL and POOLE, Circuit Judges. SKOPIL, Circuit Judge: 1 We are asked to decide if the State of Washington's refusal to grant licensing reciprocity to vehicles owned and licensed by two Indian tribes violates the federal Constitution. The district court permanently enjoined the state from enforcing its motor vehicle licensing and registration requirements on vehicles licensed and registered by the tribes, reasoning that each tribe was a "jurisdiction" as defined in Wash.Rev.Code Sec.…