Tribal Court Forms and Subpoenas – How Tribes Preserve Sovereign Immunity When Responding to Requests from Federal, State, and Local Governments for Tribal Property or Tribal-Employee Testimony

Redding Rancheria has successfully created a Tribal Court Form that U.S. attorneys, the local District Attorney and Public Defender, and other third-party attorneys use to request and potentially obtain tribal property or tribal-employee testimony. By taking this approach, Redding Rancheria preserves its sovereign immunity while still cooperating with federal, state, and local governments. This issue is important based on the holding in United States v. James, 980 F.2d 1314 (9th Cir. 1992), in which the Court determined that a Tribe waived its sovereign immunity when it produced documents based on a federal subpoena. By implementing their own Tribal Court Forms and Tribal Court Subpoenas, tribes preserve sovereign immunity when responding to requests from federal, state, and local governments for tribal property or tribal-employee testimony. This approach is supported by Williams v. Lee, 358 U.S. 217 (1959), Bishop Paiute Tribe v. Cnty. Of Inyo, 291 F. 3d 549 (9th Cir. 2002) (vacated on other grounds re Section 1983 standing), and most recently Alaska v. Hayward, Case No. 1KE-25-00199CR (Alaska 2025). This interactive session will include a refresher on tribal sovereign immunity and relevant caselaw, an in-depth analysis of United States v. James, background on Redding Rancheria and its operations and processes, further discussion surrounding recent cases that support the use of Tribal Court Forms and Tribal Court Subpoenas, and time for Q&A.