State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation

Ho-Chunk Nation Cert Opposition Brief

September 1, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the brief in opposition in Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation:

Ho-Chunk Nation Cert Opposition Brief

Cert petition here.

Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation Cert Petition re: e-Poker

July 31, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here:

Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation Cert Petition

Question presented:

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) defines authorized Indian gaming as Class I, Class II, or Class III. 25 U.S.C. § 2703. Unlike Class III gaming, Class II is not subject to tribal-state gaming compacts. 25 U.S.C. § 2710. Class II gaming includes card games that “are not explicitly prohibited by the laws of the State.” 25 U.S.C. § 2703(7)(A)(ii)(II). Wisconsin’s Constitution prohibits the state legislature from authorizing any form of gambling, including poker. See Wis. Const., art. IV, § 24(1).

Prior to Congress enacting IGRA, the Court held that a state cannot enforce its gambling laws on Indian land when its policy toward gambling is civil and regulatory, rather than criminal and prohibitory. California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians,480 U.S. 202, 210 (1987). Here, the Seventh Circuit applied Cabazon to interpret IGRA. It concluded that the electronic poker offered by the Ho-Chunk Nation is Class II, not Class III, when Wisconsin’s policy toward gambling and poker is regulatory, rather than prohibitory. Under this approach, the Nation can offer e-poker in Madison, Wisconsin despite the parties’ compact, which does not authorize Class III gaming in Madison.

The question presented is:

Whether Cabazon’s “regulatory/prohibitory” test that pre-dates IGRA applies to determine whether a game is Class II or Class III gaming under IGRA?

Lower court materials here.

Seventh Circuit Ruling Favors Ho-Chunk Nation in Dispute over Poker

April 30, 2015April 30, 2015Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation:

CA7 Opinion

An excerpt:

The State of Wisconsin sued the HoChunk Nation of Wisconsin to stop the tribe from offering electronic poker at its Madison gaming facility. The state maintained that the tribe was violating its agreement with the state to refrain from conducting Class III gaming at that location. The tribe responded that its poker is a Class II game that is permitted by law. The state prevailed in the district court, and the Ho-Chunk Nation now appeals. We reverse.

Briefs are here.

Lower court materials here.

Seventh Circuit Briefs in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation

October 23, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here:

Ho-Chunk Nation Opening Brief

NIGA Amicus Brief

Wisconsin Brief

Ho-Chunk Nation Reply Brief

Lower court materials here.

Federal Court Enjoins Ho-Chunk Poker as a Class III Game

July 29, 2014July 29, 2014Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here are the materials in State of Wisconsin v. Ho-Chunk Nation (W.D. Wis.):

25 HCN Brief

22 Wisconsin Brief

29 Wisconsin Response Brief

32 Ho-Chunk Response Brief

35 DCT Order

An excerpt:

The state of Wisconsin has brought this case to enjoin defendant Ho–Chunk Nation from offering electronic poker at Ho–Chunk Gaming Madison (formerly DeJope), the Ho–Chunk Nation’s gaming facility in Madison, Wisconsin. The question raised in the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment is whether Ho–Chunk Nation’s poker game violates a compact with the state. The answer to that question turns on whether electronic poker qualifies as a “class II” or “class III” game under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Class III games are prohibited by the compact except under certain conditions not present in this case, but class II games are permitted. Because I conclude that Ho–Chunk Nation’s electronic poker game is a class III game, I am granting the state’s motion for summary judgment and denying Ho–Chunk Nation’s motion.