gaming – Page 6 – Turtle Talk

1. Whether Congress, by enacting legislation permitting an Indian tribe to purchase land on the open market and to hold it in “restricted fee,” created “Indian country,” thereby completely divesting a state of its territorial sovereignty over that land, despite the absence of any explicit statutory language reflecting congressional intent to transfer sovereignty to the tribe?

2. Whether the Indian Commerce Clause (U.S. Const., art. I, § 8) gives Congress authority to completely divest a state of the sovereignty it had
previously exercised over land for more than two centuries and transfer that sovereignty to an Indian tribe by enacting legislation permitting an Indian tribe to buy such land on the open market and to hold it in “restricted fee.”

3. Whether the mere congressional designation of “restricted fee” status on tribally owned land pursuant to the Indian Nonintercourse Act (25 U.S.C. § 177) implies an intent to transfer governmental power over that land to the tribe?

Lower court materials here.

Materials in Seminole Tribe v. Florida

December 14, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

This is the IGRA good faith suit brought by the tribe in the Northern District of Florida:

Doc 01 Complaint 10 26 2015

Doc 009 FL Motion to Dismiss

Doc 009-1 Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss

13 Seminole Response

Snoqualmie Tribe Brings Civil Rights Action against City of Snoqualmie

December 10, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Snoqualmie Indian Tribe v. City of Snoqualmie (W.D. Wash.):

Complaint

An excerpt:

The Snoqualmie Indian Tribe, as parens patriae on behalf of its Tribal members acting through the Tribal member governing body of the Snoqualmie Casino, brings this legal action to stop the City of Snoqualmie from engaging in intentional race discrimination against the Tribe. The City is the only provider of sewer utility services to the Tribe’s Snoqualmie Casino, and has been providing such services under an agreement entered into in 2004. In October 2015, the City informed the Tribe that, despite the Tribe’s continuous payment for such services, the City intends to terminate providing sewer services to the Casino by no later than November 2016. The City is also actively blocking the Tribe’s efforts to obtain sewer services without relying exclusively on the City. Without sewer services, the Casino will be forced to close indefinitely, threatening the Tribe’s ability to offer core governmental programs and services to its Tribal members, jeopardizing business relationships upon which the Tribe depends, and risking the jobs of 1200 employees. The Tribe seeks declaratory and injunctive relief to protect its right to the full and equal benefit of the law, and to enjoin Defendants from terminating sewer services in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1981 and RCW 35.67.310, and from interfering with business expectancies.