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.):

16 Interior Motion to Dismiss

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 Two Challenges to North Fork Rancheria Gaming

Here is the opinion in Club One Casino, Inc. v. Bernhardt.

Briefs here.

And here is the opinion in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of the Interior.

Briefs here.

Ninth Circuit Briefs in Stand Up for California! v. Dept. of Interior [No. 18-16830]

Here:

Opening Brief

North Fork Brief

Federal Brief

Reply

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Allows Pequots to Amend Complaint re: Improper Political Influence over Zinke in Gaming Compact Approval

Here are the new materials in State of Connecticut v. Dept. of Interior (D.D.C.):

60-1 Mashantucket Motion to File Amended Complaint

60-2 First Amended Complaint

62 Interior Opposition

63 MGM Opposition

65 Reply

66 Mashantucket Notice of Supplemental Authority

67 MGM Notice of Supplemental Authority

68 Interior Response to Notice

69 Plaintiffs Response to MGM Notice

70 Mashantucket Reply

72 DCT Order

Prior post here.

Federal Court Dismisses Connecticut & Mashantucket Pequot Claims re: Gaming Procedures

Here are the materials in State of Connecticut v. Zinke (D.D.C.):

1 Complaint

9 Plaintiffs MSJ

11-1 MGM Motion to Intervene

18 Interior Motion for Partial Dismiss

22 Interior Opposotion to 11

23 Plaintiffs Opposition to 11

27 Plaintiffs Oppositon to 18

29 MGM Reply in Support of 11

32 Interior Reply in Support of 18

51-1 Plaintiffs Supplemental Memorandum in Opposition to 18

55 Interior Response to 51

56 Plaintiffs Reply re 51

59 DCT Order

Interior and North Fork Rancheria Prevail over Stand Up for California on Tribe’s Gaming Compact Procedures

Here are the materials in Stand Up for California! v. Dept.of Interior (E.D. Cal.):

28 sufc motion for stay

29 sufc motion for summary j

37 north fork rancheria motion for summary j

39 north fork opposition to 29

41 interior motion for summary j

43 interior response to 29

44 reply in support of 29

46 sufc opposition to motions for summary j

51 north fork reply in support of 37

52 interior reply in support of 41

58 dct order

Alabama v. United States Materials

The Southern District of Alabama dismissed Alabama’s challenge to the Department of Interior’s Class III procedures, on grounds of ripeness.

Here is the opinion, courtesy of Indianz.

us-motion-to-dismiss

poarch-creek-motion-to-dismiss

alabama-response-brief

us-reply-brief

poarch-creek-reply-brief

alabama-supplemental-brief

us-supplemental-brief

poarch-band-supplemental-brief

Kickapoo v. Texas — State’s Opposition to Cert Petition

The State of Texas filed its opposition to the cert petition filed by the Kickapoo Tribe way back in February. Here is the brief — texas-cert-opp

And here is our previous post on the lower court portion of this case (with briefs), as well as a link to the Supreme Court Project’s site.

If you’ll recall, despite a USSG recommendation to deny the petition, the Court still asked for a response from the State.