MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDERI. INTRODUCTION On August 17, 2017, Plaintiff Oneida Indian Nation commenced this action against Defendant United States Department of the Interior (“Defendant” or the “Department”) pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§701 et seq. On November 27, 2017, the Department moved to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim. See Dkt. No. 14. For the following reasons, the Department’s motion to dismiss is granted.II. BACKGROUNDIn 1794, the United States of America recognized the Oneida Nation when it entered into the Treaty of Canadaigua. See Dkt. No. 1 at16. In the years following the treaty, the Oneida Nation split after some members sold a portion of the Oneida Nation’s land and formed an independent successor tribe. See id. at
17-18. This new tribe entered into treaties with the United States that established a new reservation near Green Bay, Wisconsin. See id. at17. The United States recognized the Oneida Nation of New York (“Plaintiff”) and the Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin (“OTIW”) as distinct entities and dealt with them individually. See id. Since the initial schism, the OTIW has neither resided in or exercised tribal governance in New York. See id.In 1934, Congress passed the Indian Reorganization Act of June 18, 1934, 48 Stat. 984. “[T]he [Indian Reorganization Act] was designed to provide meaningful self-government to Indian people through reorganization of tribal governments under written constitutions.” Timothy W. Joranko & Mark C. Van Norman, Indian Self-Determination at Bay: Secretarial Authority to Disapprove Tribal Constitutional Amendments, 29 Gonz. L. Rev. 81, 90 (1994). After the Indian Reorganization Act came into law, the Department conducted separate tribal elections for Plaintiff and the OTIW to determine whether either tribe would elect to be reorganized under the Indian Reorganization Act. See Dkt. No. 1 at21. The OTIW voted to reorganize under a written constitution, while Plaintiff did not. See id.In 1979, the Department began to periodically publish a list of all federally recognized tribal entities. See id. at22. This list identified which tribal entities were recognized by the United States. See id. In 1994, congress passed the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (the “List Act”), which mandated that the Secretary of the Interior periodically publish the list of federally recognized tribal entities in the Federal Register. See id. at23; see also Pub. L. No. 103-454, §103, November 2, 1994. From 1979 to 2016, Plaintiff was listed as the “Oneida Nation of New York.” See Dkt. No. 1 at24. From 1979 to 2016, the OTIW was listed as some variation of the “Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin.” See id.In late 2010, the OTIW’s government passed a resolution requesting a secretarial election to amend the tribe’s constitution pursuant to 25 U.S.C. §5123. See id. at33. Among the amendments, the OTIW intended to change its name from “Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin” to “Oneida Nation.” See id. On October 11, 2011, the Department’s Midwest Regional Office advised the OTIW that “[n]one of the proposed amendments appear to be contrary to law” and permitted the secretarial election to proceed. See id. at36. The Midwestern Regional Office did not notify Plaintiff that it was reviewing the proposed amendments. See id. at38.Although the Department concluded that the name change was not contrary to any applicable law, it nonetheless informed the OTIWthat the name “Oneida Tribe of Indians of Wisconsin” has a long history, including the reorganization under the Indian Reorganization Act. Changing the name will cause confusion for a number of entities engaged in business with the Oneida Tribe as well as other governments. Compounding this difficulty will be the name of the tribe in the state of New York, called the “Oneida Nation of New York”. While the two names would not be exactly the same[,] they are close enough so that they will undoubtedly be confused more often than they are now. The Oneida Nation of New York is often referred to as the Oneida Indian Nation, including some self-determination contracts with the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which will compound the existing confusion over this matter.Id. (emphasis omitted). While the OTIW response to the letter recognized the legitimacy of the Department’s concerns, the tribe nonetheless proceeded with the election. See id. at
