exercise of religion. Indeed, specifically concerning the Red Cross, we explicitly rejected the argument that the meaning of “instrumentality” for intergovernmental tax immunity purposes could be equated to the meaning of a government “instrumentality” in other contexts. City of Spokane, 918 F.2d at 88. We termed this a “serious logical and semantic error ----based on the fallacy that a word which has a meaning in one context must have the selfsame meaning when transplanted into an entirely different context.” Id. Government-created corporations are often held to be tax-immune government instrumentalities, but courts have also frequently found them not to be subject to constitutional treatment as government actors. Compare United States v. Michigan, 851 F.2d 803, 805 (6th Cir.1988) (<HOLDING>) with Jesinger v. Federal Credit Union, 24 F.3d
holding state immune from suit involving a federal question holding that a railroad owned and operated by the federal government was immune from antitrust action under the governmental immunity doctrine which protects the federal government its agencies and instrumentalities from the reaches of antitrust law holding that federal credit unions are governmental units within the meaning  523a8 holding federal credit unions to be government instrumentalities immune from state taxation holding state immune from suit brought in state court