Two Casinos in Romulus? Unlikely….

From the Romulus Roman: “It’s possible that the City of Romulus may house two casinos, after all.”Representatives from the Sioux Indians contacted the city recently to restart negotiations that had halted in 2004. The tribe successfully lobbied the city for a ballot issue in 2003 that paved the way for gaming in the city.

“Mayor Alan Lambert said the interest of the tribe could mean that two casinos as opposed to one could be constructed near Detroit Metropolitan Airport.”

***

“In 2005, the Hannahville Indian Tribe signed a deal with the city to open a casino on Vining Road near the airport. State and federal approvals are still pending on that proposal.”

I think they mean “Sault” Indians, not “Sioux” Indians. In any event, the chances of this happening any time soon are paltry at best.

St. Regis Mohawk Suit re: Delay in Fee to Trust Decision

In a case where the Department of Interior issued a FONSI in 2006 and the Governor of New York concurred in the trust acquisition (for gaming purposes) shortly thereafter, Secretary Kempthorne still has not taken action. So, the St. Regis Mohawk tribe sued, alleging that the only reason for the delay is Secretary Kempthorne’s “personal views opposing off-reservation gaming.

This will be an interesting case to watch.

New Proposal to Require NIGC License for Tribal Gaming Facilities

The National Indian Gaming Commission issued a draft, proposed set of regulations that would require each tribal gaming facility operator to request a license from the Commission or else be subject to shutdown. H/T Indianz.com.

The regs require tribal gaming operators to submit a showing to NIGC that the proposed facility would be compliant with applicable public safety and environmental laws — and to identify the laws that are applicable. On first glance, the question of whether some local or state laws are applicable to tribal gaming facilities is an open question in many, if not most, areas. Tribes may not want to concede that some of these laws might apply. Moreover, there are no standards as to how the NIGC would consider these submissions to be in compliance with the regs (perhaps not a big deal), so if the NIGC thinks some laws apply that the tribes doesn’t, the NIGC could hold up a license on this question. And will there be different standards for renewal applications as opposed to original applications? And that begs the question of how long the NIGC will take to review the applications — a month, a year? Can the regs be enforced against the agency (obviously, I’m not an administrative law scholar, so this might be answered by the APA)?

And, finally, to me the biggest question — does the NIGC have the authority to license tribal gaming facilities at all? There’s nothing in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act that explicitly authorizes the Commission to license tribal gaming facilities. And then there’s that ongoing litigation that the NIGC is losing — Colorado River Indian Tribes v. NIGC [DC Cir opinion] — holding that the NIGC had no authority to issue minimum internal control standards. If the NIGC can’t issue MICS, then how are they going to require these licenses?

Sounds like a lot more litigation if these regs are promulgated, in whatever form.

Michigan Indian Gaming Materials: Compacts

The 1993 stipulation and consent judgment in Tribes v. Engler is here.

The GTB compact is here — the compacts of GTB, Saginaw Chippewa, LVD, Sault Tribe, BMIC, Hannahville, and KBIC are the same.

The LTBB compact is here — the compacts of LTBB, LRB, Pokagon, and Huron Nottawaseppi are all the same. LTBB’s Mackinaw City amendment is here.

All the compact materials are available here.

A Judicial Framework for Applying Supreme Court Jurisprudence to the State Income Taxation of Indian Traders by Scott Taylor (St. Thomas)

Scott Taylor: A Judicial Framework for Applying Supreme Court Jurisprudence to the State Income Taxation of Indian Trader

From the abstract:

State income taxation of Indian traders is a legal issue that the United States Supreme Court is likely to address within the next five years. This article provides a theoretical framework for resolution of the issue by considering the political framework of the United States Constitution and the historical role that federally recognized Indian tribes have played within the American legal system. As the cases work their way through the state judicial systems, this article will provide an important theoretical starting point for the lawyers and judges dealing with the question. And when the United States Supreme Court finally addresses the issue, the Court will be able to consider the usefulness of my framework.

Virtually everyone who sells goods and services to one of the more than 560 federally recognized Indian tribes (or to their on-reservation members) is an Indian trader. Most Indian traders are in states that have an income tax. Although the United States Supreme Court has held that these sales are exempt from states sales taxes, no federal case has yet answered the income tax question. Tribes are interested in the issue because the outcome will affect their ability to tax Indian traders. States are interested because it will affect their tax revenue. Indian traders are interested because it will affect the state income taxes they pay.

The theoretical framework that I propose builds on some of the Supreme Court jurisprudence on federal Indian law. My framework looks at the structure of Congress, the inclusion of states, and the exclusion of tribes. Given Congress’ power over Indian affairs, the Supreme Court should decide cases in favor of the tribal interest whenever Congress has spoken with less than clarity. If states do not like the judicial answer, they can go to Congress and seek a legislative remedy, as they did with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in the 1980s.

Congress has regulated Indian traders for over 200 years but has never stated whether states can tax them. Given the presence of this federal regulation, the United States Supreme Court in the 1960s decided that states could not impose their sales taxes on Indian traders. In a line of subsequent Supreme Court cases, the federal preemption logic has remained largely unchanged. This same logic, when viewed in light of Congress’ role in Indian affairs and the political exclusion of tribes from Congress, leads to the conclusion that Indian traders should be exempt from state income taxes.

Congressional Research Service Reports

If anyone out there wants to find out what “secret” reports Members of Congress and their staffers read when confronted with an Indian law question, check out some of these CRS reports, now starting to appear online.

Indian Reserved Water Rights: An Overview (2005)

United States v. Lara (2003)

IGRA: Gaming on Newly Acquired Lands (2006)

Wagnon v. Prairie Band Potawatomi Nation (2005)

Cobell (2005)

Contract Support Costs: Cherokee Nation v. Leavitt (2005)

NAGPRA (2005)

Adam Walsh Act (2007)

Native Hawaiian Recognition (2005)

There are more reports at http://www.opencrs.com/