context: As a threshold issue, Plaintiffs have not demonstrated this Court has jurisdiction to review the Federal Defendants' decisions not to investigate or sanction the Community for its membership determinations. An agency's nonenforcement decision is presumptively not subject to judicial review.
citation_a.signal: no signal
citation_a.identifier: 370 F.2d 529, 531
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that discretionary action of Secretary of the Interior in ratifying and approving amendments to a tribal constitution and by-laws was not subject to judicial review
citation_a.sentence: Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 105 S.Ct. 1649, 84 L.Ed.2d 714 (1985); Twin Cities Chippewa Tribal Council v. Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, 370 F.2d 529, 531 (8th Cir.1967) (holding that discretionary action of Secretary of the Interior in ratifying and approving amendments to a tribal constitution and by-laws was not subject to judicial review); see also Ross v. Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe, 809 F.Supp. 738, 745 (D.S.D. 1992) (explaining that “[n]o authority is cited for the proposition that district courts can review or direct the discretion of the Secre tary in making the decision to approve or disapprove a per capita distribution plan under 25 U.S.C. § 2710(b)(3)(B), and it is the view of the Court that it lacks such power”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 809 F.Supp. 738, 745
citation_b.parenthetical: explaining that "[n]o authority is cited for the proposition that district courts can review or direct the discretion of the Secre tary in making the decision to approve or disapprove a per capita distribution plan under 25 U.S.C. SS 2710(b)(3)(B
citation_b.sentence: Heckler v. Chaney, 470 U.S. 821, 105 S.Ct. 1649, 84 L.Ed.2d 714 (1985); Twin Cities Chippewa Tribal Council v. Minnesota Chippewa Tribe, 370 F.2d 529, 531 (8th Cir.1967) (holding that discretionary action of Secretary of the Interior in ratifying and approving amendments to a tribal constitution and by-laws was not subject to judicial review); see also Ross v. Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe, 809 F.Supp. 738, 745 (D.S.D. 1992) (explaining that “[n]o authority is cited for the proposition that district courts can review or direct the discretion of the Secre tary in making the decision to approve or disapprove a per capita distribution plan under 25 U.S.C. § 2710(b)(3)(B), and it is the view of the Court that it lacks such power”).