## Facts

- Robert Grant, a member of the Karuk Tribe, worked for the Karuk Tribe Housing Authority (KTHA), a governmental arm of a federally recognized tribe in northern California.
- Grant filed an administrative charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging age-based termination in violation of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA).
- The EEOC investigated and issued an administrative subpoena to KTHA seeking employment records.
- KTHA refused to comply, asserting (1) tribal sovereign immunity and (2) that the ADEA did not apply to the tribe in these circumstances.
- The EEOC sought judicial enforcement of the subpoena in the Northern District of California; the district court ordered compliance.
- KTHA appealed; the Ninth Circuit reversed.

## Issues

1. Whether tribal sovereign immunity bars the EEOC, acting in the federal government’s enforcement capacity, from suing to enforce an administrative subpoena against a tribal governmental entity.
2. Whether the ADEA applies to a tribe’s employment relationship with a tribal member employed by a tribal governmental arm in an intramural self-governance setting.
3. Whether statutory coverage under the ADEA is a ripe, threshold question that may be decided at the subpoena-enforcement stage.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit held tribal sovereign immunity did not bar a subpoena-enforcement action brought by the United States through the EEOC.
- The court held the ADEA did not apply to this employment relationship because it was a purely internal matter tied to tribal self-governance and Congress had not clearly indicated coverage.
- The court held the statutory-coverage question was a purely legal, ripe threshold issue properly resolved at the subpoena-enforcement stage.
- Because the ADEA did not apply, the EEOC lacked authority to investigate this charge and KTHA was not required to comply with the subpoena.
- The district court’s subpoena-enforcement order was reversed.

## Legal Principles

- Tribal sovereign immunity generally bars private suits absent waiver or congressional authorization, but it does not bar enforcement actions brought by the federal government.
- For federal statutes of general applicability, courts consider whether applying the statute would interfere with tribal self-government, among other limitations; interference with intramural tribal governance weighs strongly against application absent clear congressional intent.
- A court may decide a statute’s threshold applicability to a respondent at the subpoena-enforcement stage when the question is purely legal and resolving it early prevents unnecessary burdens inconsistent with the respondent’s special legal status.
- An administrative subpoena cannot be judicially enforced where the agency lacks statutory authority to investigate the underlying matter due to lack of statutory coverage.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit concluded that, although the EEOC could sue a tribal entity without being barred by sovereign immunity, the ADEA did not reach a tribal governmental employer’s internal employment relationship with a tribal member, so the EEOC’s subpoena could not be enforced.


Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. Karuk Tribe Hous. Auth., 260 F.3d 1071 (9th Cir. 2001)