⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Sixth Circuit hears a former professor’s suit against a tribal community college in Michigan. Jesse Koenig says college officials falsified information for their accreditor, and that he lost his job after reporting his concerns. He sued the college and three officials, including for retaliation under the False Claims Act. The district court dismissed the suit on tribal sovereign immunity grounds, without deciding whether the alleged retaliation occurred. Tribal sovereign immunity generally protects a tribe from being sued unless Congress authorizes the suit or the tribe clearly waives immunity. An arm of the tribe is an entity that shares that protection because of its relationship to the tribal government. The parties dispute whether this college qualifies, given its separate corporate form, governance and financial arrangements. The judges will discuss a recent Supreme Court decision holding that New Jersey Transit does not share New Jersey’s sovereign immunity. That decision emphasizes legal separateness and responsibility for judgments. The professor’s lawyer will argue that its reasoning applies here. The college will argue that its tribal status and the federal tribal-education framework make this case different. There is also a distinct question about the three officials. A personal-capacity suit seeks to hold people individually liable, rather than suing their office. Courts look at who would actually be legally bound, not just the names on the complaint. The False Claims Act protects certain lawful anti-fraud efforts from retaliation. Whether it permits these individual claims is separate from whether tribal immunity blocks them.

Jesse Koenig v. Keweenaw Bay Ojibwa Community College (No. 25-1872) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, argued October 20, 2026.