Oklahoma SCT Declares Gov. Stitt’s Gaming Compacts with UKB and Kialegee are Invalid

Here is the opinion in Treat v. Stitt.

Briefs:

Petitioner’s Brief

Response Brief

Petitioner’s Reply Brief

An excerpt:

Petitioners, the Honorable Greg Treat, Senate President Pro Tempore, and the Honorable Charles McCall, Speaker of the House, request the Court to assume original jurisdiction to declare that the new tribal gaming compacts between the State and the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and between the State and the Kialegee Tribal Town are invalid under Oklahoma law. The Court assumes original jurisdiction. Okla. Const. art. VII, § 4. The Court invokes its publici juris doctrine to assume original jurisdiction here as Petitioners have presented this Court with an issue of public interest in urgent need of judicial determination. Fent v. Contingency Review Bd.2007 OK 27, ¶ 11, 163 P.3d 512, 521. The Court grants the declaratory relief sought by Petitioners, as the Executive branch did not validly enter into the new tribal gaming compacts with the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians and the Kialegee Tribal Town. Ethics Comm’n of State of Okla. v. Cullison1993 OK 37, ¶ 4, 850 P.2d 1069, 1072.

Kialegee Tribal Town Sues DOI Over Jurisdiction After Muscogee (Creek) Nation Raid

Links: Tulsa World coverage

Download(PDF) complaint in the matter of Kialegee Tribal Town v. Zinke et al, 17-cv-01670 (D.C. Circuit August 17, 2017): Doc. 1 – Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief

Kialegee Tribal Town is arguing the precedence of last week’s Murphy v. Royal like Cherokee Nation is in McKesson v. Hembree.

Seventh Circuit Briefs in MCZ Development Corp. v. Dickinson Wright

Here:

MCZ Opening Brief

Dickinson Brief

Other briefs TK

Lower court materials here.

Statement from the appellant’s brief:

This is a legal malpractice action stemming from legal services and advice Appellees provided Appellants beginning in December 2009. The legal services and advice pertained to Appellants’ planned investment in and development of an Indian gaming casino in Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, in conjunction with the Kialegee Tribal Town (the “Tribe”), an Indian tribe.The advice which Appellants contend caused them to sustain damages hinged on whether potential legal or regulatory issues could prevent Appellants from moving forward with the project once development and construction of the site began.

Oklahoma v. Hobia Cert Stage Briefing Complete

Here:

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari

Hobia Cert Opp

Oklahoma Reply

Lower court materials here.

Hobia Cert Opposition Brief

Here:

Hobia Cert Opp

Cert petition here.

Oklahoma v. Hobia Cert Petition

Here:

Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (as filed)

Question presented:

Does Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, 134 S.Ct. 2024 (2014), require the dismissal of a State’s suit to prevent tribal officers from conducting gaming that would be unlawful under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and a state-tribal compact when

• the suit for declaratory and injunctive relief has been brought against tribal officials – not the tribe;
• the gaming will occur in Indian country, on the land of another tribe; and

• the state-tribal compact’s arbitration provision does not require arbitration before filing suit?

Lower court materials here.

Who Won Indian Law and Policy in 2014? First Round Bracket — 1 of 8

Alright, let’s try this.

In category 1, Indian nations, we’ll divide the bracket up into two, so you’ll be voting in four contests here. Four more later in the day. Let’s say you have until midnight eastern to vote.

***

#1 Alaska Native tribes

My overall number one seed, what with Congress repealing the Alaska exceptions from VAWA, Interior adopting a fee to trust rule, a big voting rights win, an important victory for tribal court jurisdiction, and another win on tribal governance matters. And perhaps the biggest is the Supreme Court’s denial of cert in Alaska v. Jewell, the subsistence hunting case. Alaska has Judge Voluck, too. The Alaska Supreme Court has been making things harder on the ICWA front however, here, here, and here, though perhaps the DOJ’s intervention in one case will make a difference, and the government’s effort to set the Alaska AG right is encouraging.

v.

# 16 Buena Vista Rancheria

The Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians made a splash in federal court this year, winning one in the Supreme Court (well, a denial of cert) and losing one in the D.C. Circuit.

# 8 Omaha Tribe

The Omaha Tribe won a huge victory in the Eighth Circuit, which affirmed Judge Richard “Hercules” Kopf’s decision rejecting Nebraska’s effort to have the tribe’s reservation declared disestablished.

v.

# 9 Kialegee Tribal Town

The tribe won a big decision in the Tenth Circuit over its dispute with Oklahoma on the Broken Arrow Casino. A beneficiary of the massive Bay Mills win in the Supreme Court.

# 4 Cayuga Indian Nation

Cayuga won a big sovereign immunity decision in the Second Circuit, another beneficiary of the Bay Mills win in the Supreme Court. It wasn’t all pretty though, as tribal leadership disputes spill out in federal and state forums.

v.

# 13 Big Lagoon Rancheria

One of the few tribes to make the list by not really winning anything in 2014; in fact, losing a biggie in the Ninth Circuit. But the court granted en banc review, and oral argument looked pretty good for tribal interests. We’ll see.

# 5 Resource tribes

Well, Interior announced that resource extraction royalties they collected reached over $1 Billion in a single year for the first time. But fracking is bad for the environment, the MHA Nation is overrun with corruption and human trafficking, and oil prices are down 33 percent. Hope they’re saving their money. Oh wait, they’re not. I guess this one is really about the MHA Nation, so let’s make that change now.

The real # 5, MHA Nation

v.

# 12 Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians

Perhaps the most immediate beneficiary of the Bay Mills win in the Supreme Court, which persuaded the State of Michigan to seek another route to fighting Sault Tribe’s Lansing casino proposal. But not before Sault Tribe proposed two huge off-reservation casinos. Oh yeah, they won a $74 million contract case, too. Pretty good year. Ok, that persuades me, Sault Tribe’s seeding just jumped from 12 to 2 and knocks down BMIC, who actually won a SCT case this year.

The real # 12, Oneida Indian Tribe of Wisconsin

They earned a huge cert denial in their long-running fight with the Village of Hobart. And they filed an important amicus brief in the Stockbridge-Munsee cert petition.

Tenth Circuit Issues Amended Opinion in Oklahoma v. Hobia

Here. Like its earlier decision, today’s amended opinion concludes that the district court erroneously granted the State’s request for a preliminary injunction and held that the State’s complaint, which alleged class III gaming activities on non-Indian lands, failed to state a claim under IGRA.

The Tenth Circuit also reiterated that arbitration provisions in the state’s gaming compact effectively barred Oklahoma from suing tribal officials in federal court for purported violations of the compact. The court remanded the matter to the Northern District of Oklahoma with instructions to vacate the preliminary injunction and to dismiss Oklahoma’s complaint with prejudice.

Also, the court denied the petition for en banc review.

Panel materials are here.

Tenth Circuit Reverses Oklahoma v. Hobia Relying on Bay Mills

Here is the opinion:

CA10 Opinion

Lower court supplemental briefs here.

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Tenth Circuit Supplemental Briefs in Oklahoma v. Hobia re: Bay Mills Decision

Here:

Oklahoma Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

Tribal Supplemental Brief re Bay Mills

The Tenth Circuit previously abated this matter pending the outcome in Michigan v. Bay Mills.