gaming – Page 17 – Turtle Talk

In 2005, Amador County, California brought suit against the Department of Interior challenging the Secretary’s approval of a gaming compact between the Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians (the “Tribe”) and the State of California. After nearly six-and-a-half years of litigation, the Tribe sought to intervene for the limited purpose of moving to dismiss the amended complaint under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. The district court denied the motion as untimely, and this appeal followed. Because we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

Briefs and lower court materials here.

Supreme Court Denies Cert in Friends of Amador County v. Jewell

December 1, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the order list.

Cert stage briefs here.

Lower court materials here.

Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe Sues South Dakota over Taxes and Casino Regulation

November 24, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the complaint in Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe v. Gerlach (D. S.D.):

1 Complaint

An excerpt:

1. This action seeks a judgment declaring that, under federal law, the State of South Dakota does not have authority to impose its use tax on the use, storage or consumption, by nonmembers of the Tribe, on the Tribe’s reservation, of goods and services purchased by nonmembers from the Tribe at the Tribe’s gaming facility, which is operated pursuant to and in accordance with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2721, (the “Tribe’s gaming facility” or the “Tribe’s Casino Complex”) and that the State lacks authority to require the Tribe to collect such use taxes from such non-member patrons and remit such taxes to the State.

2. This action also seeks a declaratory judgment that federal law prohibits the State of South Dakota from refusing to reissue alcoholic beverage licenses to the Tribe for the Tribe’s gaming facility on the basis that the Tribe has failed to remit to the Department of Revenue “all use tax incurred by nonmembers as a result of the operation of the licensed premises, and any other state tax.” SDCL § 35-2-24.

3. This action also seeks a declaratory judgment that pursuant to IGRA, the State of South Dakota does not have authority to regulate the Tribe’s sale of alcoholic beverages at the Tribe’s gaming facility.

Other materials:

Argus_Article_-_11202014

Letter_to_Tribal_Leadership_from_President_Reider