New Mexico Pueblos Prevail in Revenue Sharing Dispute with State [Free Play]

Here are the materials in Pueblo of Isleta v. Lujan Grisham (D.N.M.):

55 State MSJ

58 Pueblo Response

62 State Reply

67-1 Santa Ana Pueblo et al MSJ

68 Isleta Pueblo et al MSJ

71 State Response to 68

72 State Response to 67

74 Isleta Reply

81 State Motion for Discovery

84 Pueblos Motion for Protective Order

88 State Response to 84

91 Pueblos Reply in Support of 84

125 DCT Order

Complaint here.

Isleta Pueblo Sues New Mexico over Revenue Sharing

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.

Tenth Circuit Briefs in New Mexico v. Dept. of Interior (Challenge to Part 291 Regs re: Pojoaque Pueblo)

Here are the briefs:

Interior Opening Brief

Pojoaque Opening Brief

New Mexico Brief

Interior Reply Brief

Pojoaque Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Ninth Circuit Sitting En Banc Rules in Favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria in Gaming Dispute with California

Here is the opinion in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California:


From the court’s syllabus:

The en banc court affirmed the district court’s summary judgment in favor of a tribe that alleged that the State of California had failed to negotiate in good faith for a gaming compact under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act for Class III gaming on a parcel of land taken into trust for the tribe by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.

Rejecting California’s argument that the tribe lacked standing to compel it to negotiate in good faith under the IGRA, the en banc court held that the State’s argument amounted to an improper collateral attack on the BIA’s decisions to take the parcel of land into trust and to designate the tribe as a federally recognized Indian tribe. The en banc court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in failing to grant a continuance for additional discovery under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56(f).

The en banc court dismissed the tribe’s cross-appeal as moot.

Links to oral argument and briefs here.

Federal Court Invalidates Part 291 Secretarial Procedures in Pojoaque Pueblo Case

Here are the materials in State of New Mexico v. Dept. of Interior (D. N.M.):

37 Interior Motion for Summary J

39 New Mexico Motion for Summary J

40 Pojoaque Opposition

41 New Mexico Opposition

42 Interior Opposition

43 Pojoaque Reply

44 Interior Reply

46 New Mexico Reply

48 DCT Order

An excerpt:

Plaintiff State of New Mexico challenges the Department of the Interior and the Secretary of the Interior’s legal authority to implement regulations found in 25 C.F.R. § 291 (“Secretarial Procedures” or “Part 291 regulations”). The Secretarial Procedures, if adopted, would allow the Pueblo of Pojoaque to conduct Class III gaming on its reservation. New Mexico asks this Court to declare the Secretarial Procedures invalid because they conflict with the unambiguous terms of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. and violate New Mexico’s sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment.

Big Lagoon En Banc Oral Argument Materials

Here is “Small Native American Tribe and U.S. Duke It Out at the 9th Circuit.”

This seems like a misleading headline since the tribe and Feds were on the same side. In short, argument seemed to go well for tribal interests.

You can access the argument here.

Materials here.

Ninth Circuit to Video Stream En banc Arguments in Big Lagoon Rancheria Gaming Matter (Sept. 17, 2014)

Here is the news release. An excerpt:

On Wednesday, September 17, 2014, beginning at 10 a.m., the court will hear oral arguments in Big Lagoon Rancheria v. State of California, in which the state appeals the summary judgment by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in favor of Big Lagoon Rancheria, an Indian reservation near Eureka.  The lower court determined that the state violated the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act by failing to negotiate in good faith for a tribal-state gaming compact.

Here is the panel: Alex Kozinski, Harry Pregerson, Stephen Reinhardt, Diarmuid O’Scannlain, Susan Graber, William Fletcher, Richard Paez, Jay S. Bybee, Milan Smith, Morgan Christen, and Jacqueline Nguyen

En banc materials here.

Panel materials here.

Ninth Circuit to Re-Hear Big Lagoon Rancheria Appeal Sept. 17, 2014


Big Lagoon — CA9 Order Setting Oral Argument

En banc materials here.

Panel materials here.