New York Brief
Lower court materials here.
S238544 – UNITED AUBURN INDIAN COMMUNITY OF THE AUBURN RANCHERIA v. NEWSOM
(Groban, J., not participating, Fybel, J., assigned justice pro tempore)
- Appellant’s Petition for Review Filed on November 22, 2016
- Appellant’s Request for Judicial Notice Filed on November 22, 2016
- Appellant’s Request for Judicial Notice Filed on December 14, 2016
- Appellant’s Opening Brief on the Merits Filed on March 27, 2017
- Appellant’s Request for Judicial Notice Filed on March 28, 2017
- Respondent’s Answer Brief on the Merits Filed on June 26, 2017
- Appellant’s Reply Brief on the Merits Filed on August 23, 2017
- Amicus Curiae Brief of The Mooretown Rancheria of Maidu Indians of California and The Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community Filed on September 28, 2017
- Amicus Curiae Brief of Picayune Rancheria of Chukchansi Indians Filed on October 10, 2017
- Amicus Curiae Brief of North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians Filed on October 10, 2017
- Amicus Curiae Brief of Estom Yumeka Maidu Tribe of the Enterprise Rancheria, California, Filed on October 10, 2017
- Amicus Curiae Brief of Stand Up For California! Filed on October 10, 2017
- Respondent’s Response to Amicus Curiae Brief Filed on December 8, 2017
- Respondent’s Supplemental Brief Filed on May 22, 2020
Here is the opinion in Club One Casino, Inc. v. Bernhardt.
And here is the opinion in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of the Interior.
Here is today’s order list.
Cert stage materials in Noem v. Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe.
Here is the petition in Rogers County Board of Tax Roll Corrections v. Video Gaming Technologies, Inc.:
20200514142407520_Petition for Writ of Certiorari
20200514142428474_Appendix for Petition for Writ of Certiorari
Whether a generally applicable state ad valorem tax, as assessed against personal property owned by a non-Indian, out-of-state corporate entity and leased to a tribe for use in its casino operations, is preempted by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and the Court’s “particularized inquiry” balancing test, see White Mountain Apache Tribe v. Bracker, 448 U.S. 136 (1980), where the tax does not infringe on any federal regulatory purpose contained in the IGRA, the tax does not interfere with any tribal sovereignty interests, and the tax supports relevant and important government interests, such as law enforcement, schools and health services.
Lower court decision here.
Here is the order in Fort Sill Apache Tribe v. National Indian Gaming Commission (D.D.C.):
137 DCT Order
Here is the opinion in Cherokee Nation v. Bernhardt (N.D. Okla.):
Prior post here.
Here is the opinion in Cayuga Nation v. Tanner (N.D. N.Y.):