Fwd: B. Historical Basis of Sovereign Immunity Doctrine In 1831, the United States Supreme Court first recognized that native Indian tribes possess sovereignty that is different from foreign countries, and is subject to the dominion of the United Sta  B. Historical Basis of Sovereign Immunity Doctrine In 1831, the United States Supreme Court first recognized that native Indian tribes possess sovereignty that is different from foreign countries, and is subject to the dominion of the United States B. Historical Basis of Sovereign Immunity Doctrine In 1831, the United States Supreme Court first recognized that native Indian tribes possess sovereignty that is different from foreign countries, and is subject to the dominion of the United States The general rule still holds that although Indian tribes are not immune from lawsuits filed against them by the United States, the Indian tribes' sovereign status affords them immunity from state jurisdiction. (See Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law (2005 ed.) § 7.05[1][a], p. 636 (Cohen).) "Although the immunity extends to entities that are arms of the tribes, it apparently does not cover tribally chartered corporations that are completely independent of the tribe. Nor does the immunity extend to members of the tribe just because of their status as members. ... When tribal officials act outside the bounds of their lawful authority, however, most courts would extend the doctrine of Ex Parte Young [(1908) 209 U.S. 123 [52 L. Ed. 714, 28 S. Ct. 441]] to allow suits against the officials, at least for declaratory or injunctive relief." (Cohen, supra, § 7.05[1][a], pp. 636-637, fns. omitted. The general rule still holds that although Indian tribes are not immune from lawsuits filed against them by the United States, the Indian tribes' sovereign status affords them immunity from state jurisdiction. (See Cohen, Handbook of Federal Indian Law (2005 ed.) § 7.05[1][a], p. 636 (Cohen).) "Although the immunity extends to entities that are arms of the tribes, it apparently does not cover tribally chartered corporations that are completely independent of the tribe. Nor does the immunity extend to members of the tribe just because of their status as members. ... When tribal officials act outside the bounds of their lawful authority, however, most courts would extend the doctrine of Ex Parte Young [(1908) 209 U.S. 123 [52 L. Ed. 714, 28 S. Ct. 441]] to allow suits against the officials, at least for declaratory or injunctive relief." (Cohen, supra, § 7.05[1][a], pp. 636-637, fns. omitted.