Indian Gaming Regulatory Act 2019

Purchasers have access to all three of the following file formats:

pdf
epub
mobi

THIS CASEBOOK contains a selection of U. S. Court of Appeals decisions that analyze, interpret and apply provisions of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.

Congress passed IGRA to establish a framework for regulating gaming on Indian lands. See 25 U.S.C. § 2702. Under that framework, IGRA creates three classes of gaming. In re Indian Gaming Related Cases, 331 F.3d 1094, 1096-97 (9th Cir. 2003) (Coyote Valley II). Class III gaming, the kind at issue here, "includes the types of high-stakes games usually associated with Nevada-style gambling," and "is subject to a greater degree of federal-state regulation than either class I or class II gaming." Coyote Valley II, 331 F.3d at 1097; see also 25 U.S.C. § 2703(8) (defining "class III gaming"). In general, class III gaming may occur on Indian lands only if the activity is (1) authorized by an ordinance or resolution "adopted by the governing body of the Indian tribe having jurisdiction over such lands" and "approved by the Chairman" of the National Indian Gaming Commission ("the Chairperson"); (2) "located in a State that permits such gaming for any purpose by any person, organization, or entity"; and (3) "conducted in conformance with a Tribal-State compact entered into by the Indian tribe and the State . . . that is in effect." 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d)(1). Chemehuevi Indian Tribe v. Newsom, (9th Cir. 2019).

To conduct class II gaming, an "Indian tribe" must adopt a "tribal ordinance" concerning the regulation of class II gaming, and submit the ordinance to the Chair of the Gaming Commission for approval. 25 U.S.C. § 2710(b). Frank's Landing Indian Community v. National Indian Gaming Commission, (9th Cir. 2019).

Class I gaming, which includes traditional Native American gaming, is always permitted[.] Com. of Mass. v. Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head, 853 F. 3d 618 (1st Cir. 2017).