The amendment resulted in a new IRA Section 18a, which maintained the simple majority but added a separate 30 percent quorum, stating: In any election heretofore or hereafter held under the Act of June 18, 1934 (48 Stat. 984) 25 U.S.C. 461 et seq.], on the question of excluding a reservation from the application of the said Act or on the question of adopting a constitution and bylaws or amendments thereto or on the question of ratifying a charter, the vote of a majority of those actually voting shall be necessary and sufficient to effectuate such exclusion, adoption, or ratification, as the case may be: Provided, however, That in each instance the total vote cast shall not be less than 30 per centum of those entitled to vote. 25 U.S.C. § 5127 (June 15, 1935, ch.

Consolidated Salmonid at 818-819. B. The Indian Reorganization Act Applicable law here includes the IRA, 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq., which authorizes Indian tribes to “organize for [their] common welfare” by adopting a tribal constitution and bylaws. 25 U.S.C. § 476(a).

In 1934, the Cupeño and Pala Luiseño Reject the Opportunity to Unify As a Single Tribe under the Indian Reorganization Act. In 1934, Congress passed the Indian Reorganization Act (the “IRA”) [See 48 Stat. 984 (1934) currently codified as amended at 25 U.S.C. §§ 461 to 479.] Section 16 of the IRA, as originally enacted, provided in part: Any Indian tribe, or tribes, residing on the same reservation, shall have the right to organize for its common welfare, and may adopt an appropriate constitution and bylaws, which shall become effective when ratified by a majority vote of the adult members of the tribe, or of the adult Indians residing on such reservation, as the case may be, at a special election authorized and called by the Secretary of the Interior under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe. 48 Stat. 987, 25 U.S.C. § 476 (1986) (emphasis added.)

. III. BACKGROUND A. Indian Reorganization Act The IRA, 25 U.S.C. §§ 461-79, was enacted in 1934 as part of the federal government’s 2 The Department’s administrative appeal regulations authorize the AS-IA to assume jurisdiction over such appeals pending with the IBIA by notifying the IBIA within 15 days of receipt of a notice of appeal. 25 C.F.R. § 2.

Id. at 842-44. But the legislative history of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq. (“IRA”), clearly shows that—at least absent an existing treaty—the phrase “under federal jurisdiction” was meant to limit the provisions of that Act to “tribes” on whose behalf the federal government owned land (e.g., a reservation). Where the legislative history clearly establishes Congress’s intent, there is no room for agency interpretation. The Federal Defendants are judicially estopped, and the Ione Band collaterally estopped, from contending otherwise now.

Each Tribe has adopted its own Constitution and each has adopted the Indian Reorganization Act (“IRA”), legislation intended to reverse some of the negative impacts of the homesteading era and to modernize tribal government. 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq. The United States interacts with each Tribe separately on a nation-to-nation basis on present day matters just as it interacted with each band separately on a nation-to-nation basis under the extant Treaties.

" Colville, 447 U.S. at 155. The Court reviewed the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, 25 U.S.C. § 461 et seq., the Indian Financing Act of 1974, 25 U.S.C. § 1451 et seq., and the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975, 25 U.S.C. § 450 et seq., the first and third of which Tulalip cites in its Complaint. See Dkt.

Plaintiff’s claim that the Tribe is not an “Indian Tribe” covered by Section 19 of the IRA could deprive the Tribe of the right to obtain federal trust lands under other circumstances—and it could deny the Tribe other important benefits that, under the IRA and similar statutes, are limited to Tribes with land in trust. See 25 U.S.C. § 461, et seq.; 26 U.S.C. § 168(j); 26 U.S.C. § 45A; 26 U.S.C. § 7871(c)(3); 25 U.S.C. §§ 1521, et seq. 4 3 Indeed, as of April 2005, the Tribe’s unemployment rate was approximately 27%, which is six times higher than that of non-Tribal members in the surrounding area for the time period. Sprague Decl.