Here are the new materials in Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians v. Dept. of the Interior (D.D.C.):
17-1 Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Motion to Intervene
Complaint posted here.
Indian gaming
New Mexico COA Certifies Tribal Gaming/Immunity Cases to New Mexico SCT
Here is the order in Sipp v. Buffalo Thunder Inc.:
36924 and 38636 Certification Order (FINAL)
The question certified:
[W]hether the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2721 (2018), permits tribes and states to contract in Tribal-State Class III Gaming Compacts to shift jurisdiction over certain matters to state courts.
Connecticut, Pequot, and Mohegan Allowed to Intervene and Assert Rule 19 Defense in MGM Challenge to Gaming Compacts
Here are the materials so far in MGM Resorts Global Development LLC v. Dept. of Interior (D.D.C.):
24-1 State & Tribal Sovereigns Motion to Intervene
27 MGM Response to Motion to Dismiss
33 Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss
34 MGM Opposition to Motion to Intervene
36 Reply in Support of Motion to Intervene
38 DCT Order Granting Motion to Intervene
We posted the complaint here.
Ninth Circuit Rejects Challenge to Jamul Indian Village Gaming Ops
Here is the opinion in Jamul Action Committee v. Simermeyer.
Briefs here.
Ninth Circuit Decides Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians v. California
NIGC Settlement Materials re: St. Croix Chippewa
California SCT Decides United Auburn Community of the Auburn Rancheria v. Newsom
Here is the opinion:
An excerpt:
This is a case about how California law applies to the delicate juncture of executive power, federalism, and tribal sovereignty. Under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA; 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq.), the United States Secretary of the Interior (Interior Secretary) may permit casino-style gaming on certain land taken into federal trust for an Indian tribe, so long as the Governor of the state where the land is located concurs. But nowhere in the California Constitution is the Governor granted explicit authority to concur in this cooperative-federalism scheme. We must decide whether the
Governor nonetheless has the authority to concur in the Interior Secretary’s determination to allow gaming on tribal trust land in California.What we hold is that California law empowers the Governor to concur.
Briefs here.
Ninth Circuit Briefs in Kalispel Tribe of Indians v. Dept. of the Interior
Tribes Sues California over Gaming Compact Negotiations
Here is the complaint in Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community v. State of California (E.D. Cal.):
Oklahoma Tribes Sue Interior over Gaming Compact Approvals
Here is the complaint in Cherokee Nation v. Dept. of the Interior (D.D.C.):
1-2 Otoe-Missouria Gaming Compact
Update:
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.