FEDERAL · 25 U.S.C. · Chapter SUBCHAPTER III—TRADERS WITH INDIANS
Persons permitted to trade with Indians
25 U.S.C. § 262
Title25 — Indians
ChapterSUBCHAPTER III—TRADERS WITH INDIANS
This text of 25 U.S.C. § 262 (Persons permitted to trade with Indians) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
25 U.S.C. § 262.
Text
Any person desiring to trade with the Indians on any Indian reservation shall, upon establishing the fact, to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, that he is a proper person to engage in such trade, be permitted to do so under such rules and regulations as the Commissioner of Indian Affairs may prescribe for the protection of said Indians.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Williams v. Lee
358 U.S. 217 (Supreme Court, 1959)
Warren Trading Post Co. v. Arizona Tax Commission
380 U.S. 685 (Supreme Court, 1965)
Rice v. Rehner
463 U.S. 713 (Supreme Court, 1983)
Department of Taxation and Finance of NY v. Milhelm Attea & Bros.
512 U.S. 61 (Supreme Court, 1994)
Central MacHinery Co. v. Arizona State Tax Commission
448 U.S. 160 (Supreme Court, 1980)
Oneida Nation of New York v. Cuomo
645 F.3d 154 (Second Circuit, 2011)
East Oakland-Fruitvale Planning Council, a Nonprofit California Corporation v. Donald Rumsfeld, Director, Office of Economic Opportunity
471 F.2d 524 (Ninth Circuit, 1972)
Herzog Bros. Trucking, Inc. v. State Tax Commission
533 N.E.2d 255 (New York Court of Appeals, 1988)
Warren Trading Post Company v. Moore
387 P.2d 809 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1963)
Williams v. Lee
319 P.2d 998 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1958)
In Re Colwash
356 P.2d 994 (Washington Supreme Court, 1960)
Big Sandy Rancheria Enters. v. Rob Bonta
1 F.4th 710 (Ninth Circuit, 2021)
New York State Department of Taxation & Finance v. St. Regis Group
161 Misc. 2d 383 (New York Supreme Court, 1994)
Central MacHinery Co. v. State
730 P.2d 843 (Arizona Supreme Court, 1986)
Ashcroft v. United States Department of Interior
679 F.2d 196 (Ninth Circuit, 1982)
Opinion No. Oag 25-86, (1986)
75 Op. Att'y Gen. 123 (Wisconsin Attorney General Reports, 1986)
New Mexico Taxation & Revenue Department v. Laguna Industries, Inc.
855 P.2d 127 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1993)
State ex rel. Starlund v. Superior Court for Yakima County
356 P.2d 994 (Washington Supreme Court, 1960)
Nm Tax. & Rev. Dept. v. Laguna Ind.
855 P.2d 127 (New Mexico Supreme Court, 1993)
Source Credit
History
(Mar. 3, 1901, ch. 832, §1, 31 Stat. 1066; Mar. 3, 1903, ch. 994, §10, 32 Stat. 1009.)
Editorial Notes
Editorial Notes
Codification
Act Mar. 3, 1901, restricted provisions to the Osages and the Osage Indian Reservation. Act Mar. 3, 1903, extended the provisions to all Indian reservations.
Executive Documents
Transfer of Functions
For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
Codification
Act Mar. 3, 1901, restricted provisions to the Osages and the Osage Indian Reservation. Act Mar. 3, 1903, extended the provisions to all Indian reservations.
Executive Documents
Transfer of Functions
For transfer of functions of other officers, employees, and agencies of Department of the Interior, with certain exceptions, to Secretary of the Interior, with power to delegate, see Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1950, §§1, 2, eff. May 24, 1950, 15 F.R. 3174, 64 Stat. 1262, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
25 U.S.C. § 262, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/usc/25/262.