Here:
Town of Aquinnah’s Cert Petition
Commonwealth of Massachusetts Cert Petition
Question presented:
Whether the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, a statute of general application, impliedly repealed other federal statutes that specifically subject Indian tribes to state restrictions on gaming, a question that has divided the courts of appeals.
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE:
Here.
If anyone has the denial letter, please send it along.
Here it is. And here:
2017-07-24 DOI Cason ltr to Sault Ste. Marie denying mandatory trust acqn
Here is the opinion in State of Kansas v. Zinke.
An excerpt:
The question in this case is whether a legal opinion letter issued by the Acting General Counsel of the National Indian Gaming Commission (“NIGC”) regarding the eligibility of Indian lands for gaming constitutes “final agency action” subject to judicial review. In response to a request from the Quapaw Tribe, the NIGC Acting General Counsel issued a legal opinion letter stating that the Tribe’s Kansas trust land was eligible for gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”). The State of Kansas and the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Cherokee, Kansas, filed suit, arguing that the letter was arbitrary, capricious, and erroneous as a matter of law. The district court concluded that the letter did not constitute reviewable final agency action under IGRA or the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”).
Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm. IGRA’s text, statutory scheme, legislative history, and attendant regulations demonstrate congressional intent to preclude judicial review of legal opinion letters. Further, the Acting General Counsel’s letter does not constitute final agency action under the APA because it has not determined any rights or obligations or produced legal consequences. In short, the letter merely expresses an advisory, non-binding opinion, without any legal effect on the status quo ante.
Briefs here.
Here is the complaint in Pueblo of Isleta v. Martinez (D.N.M.):
An excerpt:
The Plaintiffs seek a declaration, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2201, that the Defendants’ ongoing effort under the 2015 Tribal-State Gaming Compacts with the State of New Mexico (“2015 Compact”) to require each Pueblo to retroactively treat all free play credits used on Gaming Machines as revenue for purposes of calculating State revenue sharing payments under the 2007 Tribal-State Gaming Compacts with the State of New Mexico (“2007 Compact”) violates federal law.
Here is the complaint in Spokane County v. Dept. of Interior (E.D. Wash.):
An excerpt:
Spokane County, Washington (“County”) brings this action seeking review of and relief from a June 15, 2015 decision by the Department of the Interior (“Department”) approving a proposal by the Spokane Tribe of Indians to build its third casino directly below Fairchild Air Force Base’s (“Fairchild AFB”) VFR traffic pattern for Fairchild’s primary runway. The Department’s determination that this casino will not be detrimental to the surrounding community violates federal statutes governing such decisions, overrides the opposition of the vast majority of officials elected to represent the interests of the surrounding community, is belied by the record evidence and long-standing agency policy, and defies basic common sense.
Download(PDF): Tribal Listening Sessions on E.O. 13871: Reorganization of the Executive Branch
Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs, Michael S. Black, invites Tribal leaders to attend one of the listed listening sessions to provide input on improving “efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability” at the Department of the Interior.
DATES
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.