Federal Court Dismisses Muscogee (Creek) Nation Suit against Poarch Band Creek over Hickory Ground

Here are the materials in Muscogee (Creek) Nation v. Poarch Band of Creek Indians (M.D. Ala.):

190 Second Amended Complaint

200 Federal Motion to Dismiss

202 Tribal Defendants Motion to Dismiss

205 Individual Defendants Motion to Dismiss

210 Response to 200

211 Response to to 205

212 Response to 202

216 Reply in Support of 200

217 Reply in Support of 202

218 Reply in Support o 205

223 DCT Order

Prior posts here.

Eleventh Circuit Briefs in Alabama v. PCI Gaming

Here:

Alabama Opening Brief

State of Michigan et al. Amicus Brief

PCI Gaming Brief

US Amicus Brief

USET Amicus Brief

Alabama Reply

Lower court materials here.

Opening Eleventh Circuit Briefs in Alabama v. PCI Gaming

Here:

Alabama Opening Brief

State of Michigan et al. Amicus Brief

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Dismisses Alabama v. PCI Gaming Authority

Here are the materials in State of Alabama v. PCI Gaming Authority (M.D. Ala.):

1 PBCI Notice of Removal + Exhibits

14 PBCI Motion to Dismiss

17 Alabama Opposition

21 US Amicus Brief

31 Alabama Response to US Amicus

33 Michigan Amicus Brief

35 Poarch Band Reply

43 Order Granting Motion to Dismiss

Poarch Band Creek Motion to Dismiss State of Alabama Suit Challenging Tribal Bingo under State Nuisance Theory

Here are the updated materials in State of Alabama v. PCI Gaming Authority (M.D. Ala.):

PBCI Motion to Dismiss

PBCI Notice of Removal + Exhibits

Prior post here.

News coverage here.

Worker’s Comp Suit against Poarch Band Creek Casino Montgomery Dismissed

Here are the materials in Sanderford v. Creek Casino Montgomery (M.D. Ala.):

DCT Order Granting PBCI Motion

Poarch Band Motion to Dismiss

Sanderford Response

Poarch Band Reply

Federal Court Corruption/Bribery Findings Relating to Alabama Bill to Legalize Electronic Bingo

Here is the lengthy opinion in United States v. MacGregor (M.D. Ala.):

US v MacGregor.

If anyone thinks this is a post-racial society, this opinion should disabuse us of that notion. Here is an excerpt:

Beason, Lewis, and their political allies sought to defeat SB380 partly because they believed the absence of the referendum on the ballot would lower African–American voter turnout during the 2010 elections. One of the government’s recordings captured Beason and Lewis discussing political strategy with other influential Republican legislative allies. A confederate warned: “Just keep in mind if [a pro-gambling] bill passes and we have a referendum in November, every black in this state will be bused to the polls. And that ain’t gonna help.” Trial Transcript, Doc. No. 1298, at 80. The participants predicted: “Every black, every illiterate” would be “bused on HUD financed buses.” Id.Beason agreed: “That’s right. This will be busing extra…. Because you gotta have somebody to pay for those buses.” Id. at 81. One participant replied that casinos would provide “free food” and gambling certificates to get black voters to the polls. Id.
In a separate conversation, during which Lewis asked whether the predominantly black residents of Greene County were “y’all’s Indians?,” id.at 86, Beason responded by derisively referring to blacks as “Aborigines.” Id. at 87. [Footnote 2: While this remark is primarily targeted at African–Americans, the court notes that it also evidences Beason’s racist animus toward Native Americans. The history of oppression against Native Americans continues today, particularly in the American West. See, e.g., Pamela S. Karlan, Lightning in the Hand: Indians and Voting Rights, 120 Yale L.J. 1420 (2011).]
The constitutional amendment at issue is here.