Gila River Indian Community v. US Department of Veterans Affairs, No. 17-15629 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this Case
Section 511(a) of the Veterans' Judicial Review Act barred the Community's action against the VA for failing to reimburse the Community for the care it provided to veterans at tribal facilities. In this case, the Community sought review of the VA's determination that two provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act did not require the VA to reimburse the Community absent a sharing agreement. The panel held that such a determination fell under the jurisdictional bar of section 511(a) because it was plainly a question of law that affected the
provision of benefits by the Secretary of the VA to veterans, and the relief requested could clearly affect the provision of benefits. The panel also held that the presumption in Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759, 766 (1985), did not apply to section 511(a). Finally, the Community's argument that the district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1362 was waived.
Court Description: Subject Matter Jurisdiction / Veterans / Tribal Matters. The panel affirmed the district court’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of Gila River Indian Community and Gila River Health Care Corporation’s lawsuit against the Department of Veterans Affairs for failing to reimburse the Community for the care it provides to veterans at tribal facilities. The panel held that § 511(a) of the Veterans’ Judicial Review Act, 38 U.S.C. § 511(a), barred the Community’s lawsuit. The Community sought review of the VA’s determination that two provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act – 25 U.S.C. §§ 1623(b) and 1645(c) – did not require the VA to reimburse the Community absent a sharing agreement. The panel held that this determination fell under the jurisdictional bar of § 511(a) because it was plainly a question of law that affected the provision of benefits by the Secretary of the VA to veterans, and the relief requested could clearly affect the provision of benefits. The panel held that the presumption in Montana v. Blackfeet Tribe of Indians, 471 U.S. 759, 766 (1985) (holding that statutes are to be construed liberally in favor of the Indians), did not apply to § 511(a) because the Blackfeet Tribe presumption only applied to federal statutes that were passed for the benefit of Indian tribes. The panel also held GILA RIVER INDIAN CMTY. V. DEP’T OF V.A. 3 the Community’s argument that the district court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1362 was waived because the Community did not make this argument in the district court.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.