HEARTH Act Approval of Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, Residential Leasing Ordinance, 13623-13624 [2025-04962]

Download as PDF ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 25, 2025 / Notices likely to be an increase in criminal activity. Furthermore, there is still significant criminality present at the Southwest border even though encounter numbers are lower than previously. In February 2025, U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP’s) Office of Field Operations (OFO) and U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) encountered 393 criminal aliens. OFO made 645 criminal arrests, and USBP had 12 gang apprehensions. USBP referred 169 smuggling events for prosecution, and OFO referred 110 events for criminal prosecution. Officers and agents seized 14,534.99 pounds of illicit narcotics, including 589.81 pounds of deadly fentanyl. Officers and agents also seized 104 firearms and 13,822 rounds of ammunition, as well as $1,535,228,67 in currency. These numbers are only likely to increase if encounter numbers increase. Fifth, when border crossing numbers are high, unusual and overwhelming demands are imposed on law enforcement officers and agencies. There is significant danger presented to officers and agents. For example, in February 2025, CBP records indicate that 30 CBP officers/agents were assaulted. In February 2025, ICE records indicated that aliens assaulted or used force against 10 ICE Enforcement and Removal Operations officers. Even while encounter numbers were lower than average in February 2025, officers and agents at the border have consistent threats against them, and there are too many assaults and use of force incidents on officers and agents. Additionally, there is a strain on ICE resources, which takes ICE away from its mission to preserve national security and public safety. ICE has many aliens pending removal that entered during prior influxes at the Southwest border. Managing those removals requires a significant expenditure of ICE resources. As of November 24, 2024, there were 1,445,549 aliens on ICE’s non-detained docket with final orders of removal. This number will only increase should this finding not be extended. Since January 20, 2025, ICE has arrested 32,809 aliens and removed 29,033 aliens. The 32,809 arrests include 14,111 that were convicted criminals and 9,980 with pending criminal charges. 1,155 of these aliens were criminal gang members while another 39 were known or suspected terrorists. ICE currently has allocated 7,282 ERO Officers but approximately 1,295 positions, or nearly 18%, are currently vacant. The ability of ICE to properly enforce immigration laws and focus on public safety risks will be greatly hampered should this finding VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:03 Mar 24, 2025 Jkt 265001 not be extended and the previous influx of aliens resumes unabated. On the basis of the above facts, I find that these circumstances endanger the lives, property, safety, and welfare of the residents of every State in the Union. The only way to effectively prevent this danger to the States is to maintain operational control of the border, which Congress defined to mean ‘‘the prevention of all unlawful entries into the United States, including entries by terrorists, other unlawful aliens, instruments of terrorism, narcotics, and other contraband.’’ Secure Fence Act of 2006, Public Law 109–367, 2, 120 Stat. 2638 (2006); 8 U.S.C. 1701 note; see also id. (stating that the Secretary of DHS ‘‘shall take all actions the Secretary determines necessary and appropriate to achieve and maintain operational control over the entire international land and maritime borders of the United States’’). I also find that there is currently an influx of aliens arriving across our entire southern border, which requires a federal response. Accordingly, pursuant to the authorities under the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1101, et seq., including the implementing regulations identified above, I find ‘‘that there exist circumstances involving the administration of the immigration laws of the United States that endanger the lives, property, safety, or welfare of the residents’’ of all 50 States. I further find that an actual or imminent mass influx of aliens is arriving at the southern border of the United States and presents urgent circumstances requiring an immediate federal response. I therefore request the assistance of State and local governments in all 50 States. The finding is effective immediately and expires in 180 days. This finding may expire sooner in the event I find that circumstances have changed. Such a finding would be published in the Federal Register. Kristi Noem, Secretary of Homeland Security. [FR Doc. 2025–05120 Filed 3–21–25; 4:15 pm] BILLING CODE 9112–FP–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Indian Affairs [256A2100DD/AAKC001030/ A0A501010.000000] HEARTH Act Approval of Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, Residential Leasing Ordinance AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 ACTION: 13623 Notice. The Assistant Secretary— Indian Affairs approved the residential leasing ordinance adopted by the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible Tribal Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act). With this approval, the Tribe is authorized to enter into residential leases without further Secretary of the Interior approval. DATES: This approval was made on March 18, 2025. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carla Clark, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1001 Indian School Road NW, Albuquerque, NM 87104, carla.clark@bia.gov, (702) 484–3233. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: SUMMARY: I. Summary of the HEARTH Act The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process available to Tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act authorizes Tribes to negotiate and enter into business leases of Tribal trust lands with a primary term of 25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years each, without the approval of the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary). The HEARTH Act also authorizes Tribes to enter into leases for residential, recreational, religious, or educational purposes for a primary term of up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary. Participating Tribes develop Tribal leasing regulations, including an environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary’s approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The HEARTH Act requires the Secretary to approve Tribal regulations if those regulations are consistent with the Department of the Interior’s (Department) leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the HEARTH Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs, has approved the Tribal regulations for the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut. II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes The Department’s regulations governing the surface leasing of trust and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and local taxation and E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1 ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1 13624 Federal Register / Vol. 90, No. 56 / Tuesday, March 25, 2025 / Notices may be subject to taxation by the Indian Tribe with jurisdiction. See 25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble to the final regulations, the Federal Government has a strong interest in promoting economic development, self-determination, and Tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 72440, 72447– 48 (December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian leasing and the taxation of lease-related interests and activities apply with equal force to leases entered into under Tribal leasing regulations approved by the Federal Government pursuant to the HEARTH Act. Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 5108, preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, section 5108 preempts State taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands because ‘‘tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an impermissible tax on the land.’’ See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Stranburg, 799 F.3d 1324, 1331, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 (1980). The Bracker balancing test, which is conducted against a backdrop of ‘‘traditional notions of Indian self-government,’’ requires a particularized examination of the relevant State, Federal, and Tribal interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72447–48, as supplemented by the analysis below. The strong Federal and Tribal interests against State and local taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased under the Department’s leasing regulations apply equally to improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to Tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress’s overarching intent was to ‘‘allow Tribes to exercise greater control over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic development in Tribal communities.’’ 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 2012). The HEARTH Act was VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:03 Mar 24, 2025 Jkt 265001 intended to afford Tribes ‘‘flexibility to adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs’’ and to ‘‘enable [Tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.’’ H. Rep. 112–427 at 6 (2012). Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express Federal policies supporting Tribal economic development and self-determination and would threaten substantial Tribal interests in effective Tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 572 U.S. 782, 810 (2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ‘‘[a] key goal of the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-sufficient, and better positioned to fund their own sovereign functions, rather than relying on Federal funding’’). The additional costs of State and local taxation have a chilling effect on potential lessees, as well as on a Tribe that, as a result, might refrain from exercising its own sovereign right to impose a Tribal tax to support its infrastructure needs. See id. at 810–11 (finding that State and local taxes greatly discourage Tribes from raising tax revenue from the same sources because the imposition of double taxation would impede Tribal economic growth). Similar to BIA’s surface leasing regulations, Tribal regulations under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See 25 U.S.C. 415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring Tribal regulations be consistent with BIA surface leasing regulations). Furthermore, the Federal Government remains involved in the Tribal land leasing process by approving the Tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing technical assistance, upon request by a Tribe, for the development of an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the Tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding approval of the Tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not covered under the Tribal regulations according to 25 CFR part 162. Accordingly, the Federal and Tribal interests weigh heavily in favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed by Tribal leasing regulations or 25 CFR part 162. Improvements, activities, and leasehold or possessory PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 interests may be subject to taxation by the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut. Bryan Mercier, Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Exercising the delegated authority of the Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. [FR Doc. 2025–04962 Filed 3–24–25; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4337–15–P INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION [Investigation No. 337–TA–1351 (Remand)] Certain Active Matrix Organic LightEmitting Diode Display Panels and Modules for Mobile Devices, and Components Thereof; Notice of the Commission’s Final Determination Finding No Violation of Section 337; Termination of the Investigation U.S. International Trade Commission. ACTION: Notice. AGENCY: Notice is hereby given that the U.S. International Trade Commission has determined to find no violation of section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, in this investigation. The investigation is terminated in its entirety. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cathy Chen, Office of the General Counsel, U.S. International Trade Commission, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, telephone (202) 205–2392. Copies of non-confidential documents filed in connection with this investigation may be viewed on the Commission’s electronic docket system (‘‘EDIS’’) at https://edis.usitc.gov. For help accessing EDIS, please email EDIS3Help@usitc.gov. General information concerning the Commission may also be obtained by accessing its internet server at https://www.usitc.gov. Hearing-impaired persons are advised that information on this matter can be obtained by contacting the Commission’s TDD terminal, telephone (202) 205–1810. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Commission instituted this investigation on February 3, 2023, based on a complaint filed by Samsung Display Co., Ltd. (‘‘SDC’’ or ‘‘Complainant’’) of the Republic of Korea. 88 FR 7,463–64 (Feb. 3, 2023). The complaint, as supplemented, alleged violations of section 337 in the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, or the sale within the United States after importation of certain active matrix organic light-emitting diode display panels and modules for mobile devices, SUMMARY: E:\FR\FM\25MRN1.SGM 25MRN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 56 (Tuesday, March 25, 2025)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13623-13624]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-04962]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Indian Affairs

[256A2100DD/AAKC001030/A0A501010.000000]


HEARTH Act Approval of Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut, 
Residential Leasing Ordinance

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs approved the 
residential leasing ordinance adopted by the Mohegan Tribe of Indians 
of Connecticut under the Helping Expedite and Advance Responsible 
Tribal Homeownership Act of 2012 (HEARTH Act). With this approval, the 
Tribe is authorized to enter into residential leases without further 
Secretary of the Interior approval.

DATES: This approval was made on March 18, 2025.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Carla Clark, Bureau of Indian 
Affairs, Division of Real Estate Services, 1001 Indian School Road NW, 
Albuquerque, NM 87104, [email protected], (702) 484-3233.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Summary of the HEARTH Act

    The HEARTH Act makes a voluntary, alternative land leasing process 
available to Tribes, by amending the Indian Long-Term Leasing Act of 
1955, 25 U.S.C. 415. The HEARTH Act authorizes Tribes to negotiate and 
enter into business leases of Tribal trust lands with a primary term of 
25 years, and up to two renewal terms of 25 years each, without the 
approval of the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary). The HEARTH Act 
also authorizes Tribes to enter into leases for residential, 
recreational, religious, or educational purposes for a primary term of 
up to 75 years without the approval of the Secretary.
    Participating Tribes develop Tribal leasing regulations, including 
an environmental review process, and then must obtain the Secretary's 
approval of those regulations prior to entering into leases. The HEARTH 
Act requires the Secretary to approve Tribal regulations if those 
regulations are consistent with the Department of the Interior's 
(Department) leasing regulations at 25 CFR part 162 and provide for an 
environmental review process that meets requirements set forth in the 
HEARTH Act. This notice announces that the Secretary, through the 
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs, has approved the Tribal 
regulations for the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut.

II. Federal Preemption of State and Local Taxes

    The Department's regulations governing the surface leasing of trust 
and restricted Indian lands specify that, subject to applicable Federal 
law, permanent improvements on leased land, leasehold or possessory 
interests, and activities under the lease are not subject to State and 
local taxation and

[[Page 13624]]

may be subject to taxation by the Indian Tribe with jurisdiction. See 
25 CFR 162.017. As explained further in the preamble to the final 
regulations, the Federal Government has a strong interest in promoting 
economic development, self-determination, and Tribal sovereignty. 77 FR 
72440, 72447-48 (December 5, 2012). The principles supporting the 
Federal preemption of State law in the field of Indian leasing and the 
taxation of lease-related interests and activities apply with equal 
force to leases entered into under Tribal leasing regulations approved 
by the Federal Government pursuant to the HEARTH Act.
    Section 5 of the Indian Reorganization Act, 25 U.S.C. 5108, 
preempts State and local taxation of permanent improvements on trust 
land. Confederated Tribes of the Chehalis Reservation v. Thurston 
County, 724 F.3d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 2013) (citing Mescalero Apache 
Tribe v. Jones, 411 U.S. 145 (1973)). Similarly, section 5108 preempts 
State taxation of rent payments by a lessee for leased trust lands 
because ``tax on the payment of rent is indistinguishable from an 
impermissible tax on the land.'' See Seminole Tribe of Florida v. 
Stranburg, 799 F.3d 1324, 1331, n.8 (11th Cir. 2015). In addition, as 
explained in the preamble to the revised leasing regulations at 25 CFR 
part 162, Federal courts have applied a balancing test to determine 
whether State and local taxation of non-Indians on the reservation is 
preempted. White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136, 143 
(1980). The Bracker balancing test, which is conducted against a 
backdrop of ``traditional notions of Indian self-government,'' requires 
a particularized examination of the relevant State, Federal, and Tribal 
interests. We hereby adopt the Bracker analysis from the preamble to 
the surface leasing regulations, 77 FR at 72447-48, as supplemented by 
the analysis below.
    The strong Federal and Tribal interests against State and local 
taxation of improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased 
under the Department's leasing regulations apply equally to 
improvements, leaseholds, and activities on land leased pursuant to 
Tribal leasing regulations approved under the HEARTH Act. Congress's 
overarching intent was to ``allow Tribes to exercise greater control 
over their own land, support self-determination, and eliminate 
bureaucratic delays that stand in the way of homeownership and economic 
development in Tribal communities.'' 158 Cong. Rec. H. 2682 (May 15, 
2012). The HEARTH Act was intended to afford Tribes ``flexibility to 
adapt lease terms to suit [their] business and cultural needs'' and to 
``enable [Tribes] to approve leases quickly and efficiently.'' H. Rep. 
112-427 at 6 (2012).
    Assessment of State and local taxes would obstruct these express 
Federal policies supporting Tribal economic development and self-
determination and would threaten substantial Tribal interests in 
effective Tribal government, economic self-sufficiency, and territorial 
autonomy. See Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 572 U.S. 782, 810 
(2014) (Sotomayor, J., concurring) (determining that ``[a] key goal of 
the Federal Government is to render Tribes more self-sufficient, and 
better positioned to fund their own sovereign functions, rather than 
relying on Federal funding''). The additional costs of State and local 
taxation have a chilling effect on potential lessees, as well as on a 
Tribe that, as a result, might refrain from exercising its own 
sovereign right to impose a Tribal tax to support its infrastructure 
needs. See id. at 810-11 (finding that State and local taxes greatly 
discourage Tribes from raising tax revenue from the same sources 
because the imposition of double taxation would impede Tribal economic 
growth).
    Similar to BIA's surface leasing regulations, Tribal regulations 
under the HEARTH Act pervasively cover all aspects of leasing. See 25 
U.S.C. 415(h)(3)(B)(i) (requiring Tribal regulations be consistent with 
BIA surface leasing regulations). Furthermore, the Federal Government 
remains involved in the Tribal land leasing process by approving the 
Tribal leasing regulations in the first instance and providing 
technical assistance, upon request by a Tribe, for the development of 
an environmental review process. The Secretary also retains authority 
to take any necessary actions to remedy violations of a lease or of the 
Tribal regulations, including terminating the lease or rescinding 
approval of the Tribal regulations and reassuming lease approval 
responsibilities. Moreover, the Secretary continues to review, approve, 
and monitor individual Indian land leases and other types of leases not 
covered under the Tribal regulations according to 25 CFR part 162.
    Accordingly, the Federal and Tribal interests weigh heavily in 
favor of preemption of State and local taxes on lease-related 
activities and interests, regardless of whether the lease is governed 
by Tribal leasing regulations or 25 CFR part 162. Improvements, 
activities, and leasehold or possessory interests may be subject to 
taxation by the Mohegan Tribe of Indians of Connecticut.

Bryan Mercier,
Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Exercising the delegated authority 
of the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2025-04962 Filed 3-24-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4337-15-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.