Table of Cases |
|
xv | |
Preface |
|
xix | |
Copyright Acknowledgments |
|
xxiii | |
Part I Indian Gaming in Context |
|
|
|
3 | (48) |
|
A Overview of Indian Gaming |
|
|
3 | (5) |
|
Meister, Indian Gaming Industry Report (2007-2008 ed.) |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
National Indian Gaming Association 2005 Annual Report |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
B History of Gambling in the U.S. |
|
|
8 | (6) |
|
Schwartz, Roll the Bones: The History of Gambling |
|
|
8 | (1) |
|
Findlay, People of Chance: Gambling in American Society from Jamestown to Las Vegas |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
National Gambling Impact Study Commission, Final Report |
|
|
10 | (4) |
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
|
14 | (8) |
|
Aronovitz, The Regulation of Commercial Gaming |
|
|
14 | (3) |
|
Cabot & Csoka, The Games People Play: Is It Time For a New Legal Approach to Prize Games? |
|
|
17 | (4) |
|
|
21 | (1) |
|
D Tribal Governments and Federal Indian Law and Policy |
|
|
22 | (29) |
|
Wilkins, American Indian Politics and the American Political System |
|
|
22 | (3) |
|
Porter, A Proposal to the Hanodaganyas to Decolonize Federal Indian Control Law |
|
|
25 | (10) |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
Clinton, There Is No Federal Supremacy Clause for Indian Tribes |
|
|
36 | (5) |
|
|
41 | (1) |
|
Coffey & Tsosie, Rethinking the Tribal Sovereignty Doctrine: Cultural Sovereignty and the Collective Future of Indian Nations |
|
|
42 | (2) |
|
|
44 | (1) |
|
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, A Quiet Crisis: Federal Funding and Unmet Needs in Indian Country |
|
|
45 | (5) |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
Problem 1: A Regulatory Model for Indian Gaming |
|
|
50 | (1) |
|
Chapter 2 Pre-Statutory Law |
|
|
51 | (26) |
|
|
51 | (1) |
|
B Traditional Tribal Games |
|
|
51 | (4) |
|
Pasquaretta, Gambling and Survival in Native North America |
|
|
51 | (3) |
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
|
55 | (22) |
|
Goldberg, Public Law 280: The Limits of State Jurisdiction Over Reservation Indians |
|
|
55 | (3) |
|
|
58 | (1) |
|
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Butterworth |
|
|
59 | (1) |
|
Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy |
|
|
60 | (2) |
|
|
62 | (1) |
|
California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians |
|
|
63 | (7) |
|
|
70 | (4) |
|
Problem 2: Applying Cabazon |
|
|
74 | (3) |
Part II The Federal Regulatory Scheme |
|
|
Chapter 3 The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 |
|
|
77 | (42) |
|
|
77 | (1) |
|
|
77 | (22) |
|
Light & Rand, Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise |
|
|
77 | (2) |
|
Santoni, The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: How Did We Get Here? Where Are We Going? |
|
|
79 | (4) |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
Reid, Commentary in Indian Gaming and the Law |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
|
86 | (1) |
|
Udall, Commentary in Indian Gaming and the Law |
|
|
86 | (2) |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
Senate Report No. 100-446, 100th Cong. 2d Sess., 1988 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3071 |
|
|
88 | (10) |
|
|
98 | (1) |
|
C IGRA's Regulatory Framework |
|
|
99 | (20) |
|
|
99 | (1) |
|
2 Definition of "Indian Gaming" |
|
|
100 | (14) |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
Myers, Federal Recognition of Indian Tribes in the United States |
|
|
101 | (1) |
|
|
106 | (1) |
|
|
107 | (1) |
|
|
108 | (1) |
|
|
111 | (3) |
|
|
114 | (5) |
|
Sycuan Band of Mission Indians v. Roache |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
|
116 | (1) |
|
Problem 3: "Something for Everyone to Hate" |
|
|
117 | (2) |
|
Chapter 4 Bingo and Other Forms of Class II Gaming |
|
|
119 | (36) |
|
|
119 | (1) |
|
B Conducting Class II Gaming |
|
|
119 | (6) |
|
|
119 | (4) |
|
|
121 | (2) |
|
2 Tribal "Self-Regulation" |
|
|
123 | (2) |
|
|
124 | (1) |
|
C Defining Class II Gaming |
|
|
125 | (7) |
|
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community v. Hope |
|
|
126 | (2) |
|
|
128 | |
|
|
103 | (25) |
|
Electronic Gambling Devices |
|
|
128 | (3) |
|
|
131 | (1) |
|
D Class II Technologic Aids and Class III Facsimiles |
|
|
132 | (23) |
|
Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. NIGC |
|
|
133 | (1) |
|
|
134 | (2) |
|
Diamond Game Enterprises, Inc. v. Reno |
|
|
136 | (3) |
|
|
139 | (2) |
|
United States v. Santee Sioux Tribe of Nebraska |
|
|
141 | (2) |
|
|
143 | (1) |
|
Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma v. NIGC |
|
|
144 | (3) |
|
|
147 | (5) |
|
Problem 4: Class II Technologic Aid or Class III Electronic Facsimile? |
|
|
152 | (3) |
|
Chapter 5 Casino-Style or Class III Gaming |
|
|
155 | (122) |
|
|
155 | (1) |
|
B Statutory Requirements for Conducting Class III Gaming |
|
|
155 | (2) |
|
|
157 | (62) |
|
|
160 | (1) |
|
California Model Tribal-State Compact |
|
|
161 | (27) |
|
North Dakota Model Tribal-State Compact |
|
|
188 | (23) |
|
|
211 | (1) |
|
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida |
|
|
212 | (5) |
|
|
217 | (2) |
|
D Post-Seminole Environment |
|
|
219 | (23) |
|
|
220 | (10) |
|
Skibine, Gaming on Indian Reservations: Defining the Trustee's Duty in the Wake of Seminole Tribe v. Florida |
|
|
220 | (4) |
|
United States v. Spokane Tribe of Indians |
|
|
224 | (3) |
|
|
227 | (3) |
|
2 Administrative "Compacts" |
|
|
230 | (8) |
|
Class III Gaming Procedures, 25 C.F.R. pt. 291 |
|
|
230 | (5) |
|
|
235 | (3) |
|
3 Law, Politics, and Negotiation |
|
|
238 | (4) |
|
Tsosie, Negotiating Economic Survival: The Consent Principle and Tribal-State Compacts Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act |
|
|
238 | (3) |
|
|
241 | (1) |
|
Problem 5.1: Compacting Post-Seminole Tribe |
|
|
242 | (1) |
|
E State Public Policy and the Scope of Class III Gaming |
|
|
242 | (35) |
|
|
243 | (8) |
|
United States v. Sisseton-Wahpeton Sioux Tribe |
|
|
243 | (2) |
|
Mashantucket Pequot Tribe v. Connecticut |
|
|
245 | (2) |
|
Lac du Flambeau Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians v. Wisconsin |
|
|
247 | (2) |
|
|
249 | (2) |
|
|
251 | (17) |
|
Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota |
|
|
251 | (1) |
|
Coeur d'Alene Tribe v. Idaho |
|
|
252 | (2) |
|
|
254 | (6) |
|
Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson |
|
|
260 | (5) |
|
|
265 | (3) |
|
|
268 | (9) |
|
Skibine, Scope of Gaming, Good Faith Negotiations and the Secretary of Interior's Class III Gaming Procedures: Is I.G.R.A. Still a Workable Framework After Seminole? |
|
|
268 | (1) |
|
|
269 | (1) |
|
Problem 5.2: IGRAs "Permits Such Gaming" Requirement |
|
|
270 | (7) |
Part III Government Authority over Indian Gaming |
|
|
Chapter 6 Federal Authority |
|
|
277 | (34) |
|
|
277 | (1) |
|
B National Indian Gaming Commission |
|
|
277 | (31) |
|
1 Overview of NIGC Powers |
|
|
277 | (5) |
|
Seneca-Cayuga Tribe of Oklahoma v. NIGC |
|
|
280 | (2) |
|
2 Defining Class II and Class III Gaming |
|
|
282 | (6) |
|
National Indian Gaming Commission, Cadillac Jack "Triple Threat Bingo" Advisory Game Classification Opinion |
|
|
284 | (3) |
|
|
287 | (1) |
|
3 Approval of Tribal Ordinances |
|
|
288 | (1) |
|
4 Approval of Management Contracts |
|
|
289 | (10) |
|
Washburn, The Mechanics of Indian Gaming Management Contract Approval |
|
|
290 | (4) |
|
|
294 | (1) |
|
Staudenmaier, Negotiating Enforceable Tribal Gaming Management Agreements |
|
|
295 | (2) |
|
|
297 | (2) |
|
5 Investigative and Enforcement Powers |
|
|
299 | (3) |
|
|
301 | (1) |
|
6 Minimum Internal Control Standards and NIGC Authority Over Class III Gaming |
|
|
302 | (7) |
|
Colorado River Indian Tribes v. NIGC |
|
|
304 | (4) |
|
|
308 | (1) |
|
C Secretary of the Interior |
|
|
308 | (1) |
|
|
309 | (2) |
|
Problem 6: The Federal Regulatory Role |
|
|
309 | (2) |
|
Chapter 7 Tribal Authority |
|
|
311 | (44) |
|
|
311 | (1) |
|
B Tribal Gaming Commissions |
|
|
311 | (11) |
|
Deloria & Lytle, American Indians, American Justice |
|
|
311 | (3) |
|
Wilkins, American Indian Politics and the American Political System |
|
|
314 | (3) |
|
|
317 | (3) |
|
Rand & Light, How Congress Can and Should "Fix" the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: Recommendations for Law and Policy Reform |
|
|
320 | (1) |
|
|
321 | (1) |
|
|
322 | (33) |
|
|
322 | (20) |
|
NIGC Model Tribal Gaming Ordinance |
|
|
322 | (19) |
|
|
341 | (1) |
|
|
342 | (13) |
|
Kalantari v. Spirit Mountain Gaming, Inc. |
|
|
342 | (4) |
|
|
346 | (3) |
|
Long v. Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority |
|
|
349 | (4) |
|
|
353 | (1) |
|
Problem 7: The NIGC Model Tribal Gaming Ordinance |
|
|
354 | (1) |
|
Chapter 8 State Authority |
|
|
355 | (34) |
|
|
355 | (1) |
|
B State Gaming Commissions |
|
|
355 | (3) |
|
McGuinness, They Call It Gaming ... and You Can Bet It's Changed a Lot |
|
|
355 | (3) |
|
|
358 | (1) |
|
|
358 | (31) |
|
Rand, Caught in the Middle: How State Politics, State Law, and State Courts Constrain Tribal Influnce Over Indian Gaming |
|
|
358 | (1) |
|
|
359 | (13) |
|
|
360 | (4) |
|
Dairyland Greyhound Park, Inc. v. Doyle |
|
|
364 | (5) |
|
|
369 | (3) |
|
2 State Separation of Powers |
|
|
372 | (18) |
|
New Mexico ex rel. Clark v. Johnson |
|
|
372 | (4) |
|
Kansas ex rel. Stephan v. Finney |
|
|
376 | (2) |
|
Saratoga County Chamber of Commerce, Inc. v. Pataki |
|
|
378 | (2) |
|
Taxpayers of Michigan Against Casinos v. Michigan |
|
|
380 | (1) |
|
|
381 | (2) |
|
Problem 8: "Undoing" Compacts |
|
|
383 | (6) |
Part IV Policy Implications |
|
|
Chapter 9 Socioeconomic Impacts of Indian Gaming |
|
|
389 | (38) |
|
|
389 | (1) |
|
|
390 | (8) |
|
|
390 | (3) |
|
Light & Rand, Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise |
|
|
390 | (2) |
|
|
392 | (1) |
|
|
393 | (5) |
|
Taylor, Krepps, & Wang, The National Evidence on the Socioeconomic Impacts of American Indian Gaming on Non-Indian Communities |
|
|
394 | (2) |
|
Meister, Indian Gaming Industry Report (2007-2008 ed.) |
|
|
396 | (1) |
|
|
397 | (1) |
|
|
398 | (14) |
|
|
398 | (6) |
|
Light & Rand, Indian Gaming and Tribal Sovereignty: The Casino Compromise |
|
|
398 | (1) |
|
Taylor, Krepps, & Wang, The National Evidence on the Socioeconomic Impacts of American Indian Gaming on Non-Indian Communities |
|
|
399 | (2) |
|
|
401 | (3) |
|
|
404 | (8) |
|
Gerstein et al., Gambling Impact and Behavior Study: Report to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission |
|
|
404 | (3) |
|
|
407 | (1) |
|
Taylor, Krepps, & Wang, The National Evidence on the Socioeconomic Impacts of American Indian Gaming on Non-Indian Communities |
|
|
408 | (1) |
|
|
409 | (1) |
|
National Gambling Impact Study Commission, Final Report |
|
|
410 | (2) |
|
D Indian Gaming and Reservation Economic Development |
|
|
412 | (15) |
|
Gips, Current Trends in Tribal Economic Development |
|
|
412 | (3) |
|
|
415 | (1) |
|
Jorgensen & Taylor, What Determines Indian Economic Success? |
|
|
416 | (1) |
|
|
417 | (1) |
|
Miller, Economic Development in Indian Country: Will Capitalism or Socialism Succeed? |
|
|
418 | (4) |
|
|
422 | (3) |
|
Problem 9: Research Design |
|
|
425 | (2) |
|
Chapter 10 Recurring Legal and Political Issues |
|
|
427 | (78) |
|
|
427 | (1) |
|
B Gaming on Newly Acquired Lands |
|
|
427 | (33) |
|
|
427 | (6) |
|
2 Exceptions to IGRA's General Prohibition Against Gaming on Newly Acquired Land |
|
|
433 | (27) |
|
a The "Best Interests" Exception |
|
|
433 | (1) |
|
Staudenmaier, Off-Reservation Native American Gaming: An Examination of the Legal and Political Hurdles |
|
|
433 | (1) |
|
|
435 | (1) |
|
Skibine, Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Concerning Taking Land into Trust |
|
|
436 | (1) |
|
|
437 | (1) |
|
Lac Courte Oreilles Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin v. United States |
|
|
438 | (1) |
|
|
442 | (1) |
|
|
443 | (1) |
|
City of Roseville v. Norton |
|
|
444 | (1) |
|
|
449 | (1) |
|
|
458 | (1) |
|
Problem 10.1: Gaming on Newly Acquired Lands |
|
|
459 | (1) |
|
C Tribal-State Revenue-Sharing Agreements |
|
|
460 | (21) |
|
1 Interior Secretary's Interpretation of IGRA |
|
|
460 | (2) |
|
Martin, Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act |
|
|
460 | (1) |
|
|
461 | (1) |
|
2 Revenue-Sharing Agreements |
|
|
462 | (19) |
|
Light, Rand, & Meister, Spreading the Wealth: Indian Gaming and Revenue-Sharing Agreements |
|
|
462 | (4) |
|
|
466 | (1) |
|
In re Indian Gaming Related Cases |
|
|
467 | (11) |
|
|
478 | (2) |
|
Problem 10.2: Negotiating a Revenue-Sharing Agreement |
|
|
480 | (1) |
|
D Federal Tribal Recognition |
|
|
481 | (11) |
|
1 The Federal Tribal Recognition Process |
|
|
481 | (4) |
|
2 Indian Gaming and Recognition |
|
|
485 | (7) |
|
Kendall, Statement Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs on Federal Recognition of Indian Tribes |
|
|
485 | (2) |
|
|
487 | (1) |
|
Cramer, Cash, Color, and Colonialism: The Politics of Tribal Acknowledgment |
|
|
488 | (2) |
|
|
490 | (1) |
|
Problem 10.3: Tribal Recognition |
|
|
491 | (1) |
|
E Tribal Casinos as Employers |
|
|
492 | (13) |
|
San Manuel Indian Bingo & Casino v. NLRB |
|
|
492 | (6) |
|
McClatchey, Tribally-Owned Businesses Are Not "Employers": Economic Effects, Tribal Sovereignty, and NLRB v. San Manuel Band of Mission Indians |
|
|
498 | (3) |
|
|
501 | (3) |
|
Problem 10.4: The San Manuel Case |
|
|
504 | (1) |
Appendix The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 |
|
505 | (24) |
Index |
|
529 | |