California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians

Last updated
California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued December 9, 1986
Decided February 25, 1987
Full case nameCalifornia, et al. v. Cabazon band of Mission Indians, et al.
Citations480 U.S. 202 ( more )
107 S. Ct. 1083; 94 L. Ed. 2d 244; 55 U.S.L.W. 4225
Case history
Prior783 F.2d 900 (9th Cir. 1986) (affirmed and remanded)
Holding
Indian reservations may not engage in a form of gaming when that form is illegal in the state; conversely, Indian reservations may engage in a form of gaming when that form is legal in the state.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Byron White
Thurgood Marshall  · Harry Blackmun
Lewis F. Powell Jr.  · John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor  · Antonin Scalia
Case opinions
MajorityWhite, joined by Rehnquist, Brennan, Marshall, Blackmun, Powell
DissentStevens, joined by O'Connor, Scalia
Laws applied
18 U.S.C. § 1151; 28 U.S.C.S. § 1162
Superseded by
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (1988)

California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U.S. 202 (1987), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the development of Native American gaming. The Supreme Court's decision effectively overturned the existing laws restricting gaming/gambling on U.S. Indian reservations.

Contents

Background

The Cabazon and Morongo Bands of Mission Indians are two small Cahuilla Indian tribes that occupy reservation lands near Palm Springs in Riverside County, California. During the mid-1980s, both the Cabazon and Morongo Bands each owned and operated on their reservation lands small bingo parlors. In addition, the Cabazon Band operated a card club for playing poker and other card games. Both the bingo parlors and the Cabazon card club were open to the public and frequented predominantly by non-Indians visiting the reservations. In 1986, California State officials sought to shut down the Cabazon and Morongo Band's games, arguing that the high-stakes bingo and poker games violated state regulations. The case made it all the way to the Supreme Court before a decision was rendered on February 25, 1987. [1] [2]

Arguments and ruling

The State of California contended that the Bands’ high-stakes bingo and poker games violated state law and requested that the Court recognize its statute governing the operation of bingo games. Riverside County additionally sought legal recognition of its ordinances regulating bingo play and prohibiting the operation of poker and other card games. California argued that under Public Law 280 (1953) Congress had granted six states – Alaska, California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin – criminal jurisdiction over Native American tribal lands within the state's borders. [3] If California's regulatory laws prohibited gambling on a criminal basis, then it is likely Public Law 280 would have given the State of California the authority to enforce them on tribal lands. However, as the Cabazon Band argued, California's laws on gambling were civil regulatory laws, and therefore the tribal lands would not in fact fall under the lawful jurisdiction of the state. [4]

The Supreme Court held, as the Cabazon band argued, that because California state law did not prohibit gambling as a criminal act – and in fact encouraged it via the state lottery – they must be deemed regulatory in nature. As such, the authority to regulate gaming activities on tribal lands was found to fall outside those powers granted by the Public Law 280.

Cabazon had lasting implications regarding the sovereignty of Native American tribes in the United States. The ruling established a broader definition of tribal sovereignty and set the precedent that if the few states that with some lawful jurisdiction over tribal lands could not impose state regulations on reservation gaming, then no state could have such a right. Indian gaming could thus only be called into question in states where gambling was deemed criminal by state law.

Effect on Native American gaming

Cabazon coincided with a period of rapid growth in the reservation gambling industry. What just years before had been a modest and relatively isolated phenomenon of reservation bingo and card games saw steady growth following the Supreme Court decision. [5] Congress responded by passing the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) in 1988, which expanded the kinds of games that tribal casinos could offer, and provided a framework for regulating the industry. As part of the act, the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) was formed and Indian gaming was divided into 3 classes: Class I, Class II, and Class III. Class I encompasses charitable and social gaming with nominal prizes; Class II includes bingo and other punch-board/pull-tab style games; and Class III includes high-stakes bingo, casinos, slot machines, and other commercial gaming.

As of 1996, there were 184 tribes operating 281 gaming facilities. These facilities were spread across a total of 24 states, 14 of which have physical casinos on Indian reservations. In 1995, Class III gaming revenues totaled over $4.5 billion, with an additional $300 million in revenues from food sales, hotel accommodations and other services. After expenses, this amounted to $1.9 billion in net income, $1.6 billion of which went straight to the tribes on which the casinos were operating. [6] As of 2007, the tribal gaming industry had become a $25 billion industry generated by over 350 tribal casinos in 28 states. [7]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Native American gaming</span> Gambling operations on Indian reservations in the United States

Native American gaming comprises casinos, bingo halls, and other gambling operations on Indian reservations or other tribal lands in the United States. Because these areas have tribal sovereignty, states have limited ability to forbid gambling there, as codified by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988. As of 2011, there were 460 gambling operations run by 240 tribes, with a total annual revenue of $27 billion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Turning Stone Resort Casino</span> Casino and Resort in Upstate New York, USA

Turning Stone Resort Casino is a Native American resort casino owned and operated by the Oneida Indian Nation of New York (OIN) in Verona, New York.

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44 (1996), was a United States Supreme Court case which held that Article One of the U.S. Constitution did not give the United States Congress the power to abrogate the sovereign immunity of the states that is further protected under the Eleventh Amendment. Such abrogation is permitted where it is necessary to enforce the rights of citizens guaranteed under the Fourteenth Amendment as per Fitzpatrick v. Bitzer. The case also held that the doctrine of Ex parte Young, which allows state officials to be sued in their official capacity for prospective injunctive relief, was inapplicable under these circumstances, because any remedy was limited to the one that Congress had provided.

The Lytton Band of Pomo Indians is a federally recognized tribe of Pomo Native Americans. They were recognized in the late 1980s, as lineal descendants of the two families who lived at the Lytton Rancheria in Healdsburg, California from 1937 to about 1960. The tribe now has around 275 enrolled members. It has a casino in San Pablo, California, and has proposed to build housing for tribe members, plus a winery and a hotel, just west of Windsor, California, in Sonoma County.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Indian Gaming Regulatory Act</span> US federal law

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act is a 1988 United States federal law that establishes the jurisdictional framework that governs Indian gaming. There was no federal gaming structure before this act. The stated purposes of the act include providing a legislative basis for the operation/regulation of Indian gaming, protecting gaming as a means of generating revenue for the tribes, encouraging economic development of these tribes, and protecting the enterprises from negative influences. The law established the National Indian Gaming Commission and gave it a regulatory mandate. The law also delegated new authority to the U.S. Department of the Interior and created new federal offenses, giving the U.S. Department of Justice authority to prosecute them.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gambling in the United States</span>

In the United States, gambling is subject to a variety of legal restrictions. In 2008, gambling activities generated gross revenues of $92.27 billion in the United States.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Morongo Casino, Resort & Spa</span> Casino in California

Morongo Casino, Resort & Spa is a Native American gaming casino, of the Morongo Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians, located in Cabazon, California, United States, near San Gorgonio Pass. The casino has 310 rooms and suites. A 44-acre (180,000 m2), 27-story resort, Morongo is one of the largest casinos in California. At 330 feet (101 m) high, the casino tower is the tallest building in both Riverside County and the larger Inland Empire region.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians</span> Indian tribe in California, United States

The Augustine Band of Cahuilla Indians is a federally recognized Cahuilla band of Native Americans based in Coachella, California. They are one of the smallest tribal nations in the United States, consisting of only 16 members, seven of whom are adults.

Tribal-state compacts are declared necessary for any Class III gaming on Indian reservations under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA). They were designed to allow tribal and state governments to come to a "business" agreement. A compact can be thought of as "negotiated agreement between two political entities that resolves questions of overlapping jurisdictional responsibilities Compacts affect the delicate power balance between states, federal, and tribal governments. It is these forms that have been a major source of controversy surrounding Indian gaming. Thus, it is understandable that the IGRA provides very detailed instructions for how states and tribes can make compacts cooperatively and also details the instructions for how the federal government can regulate such agreements.

<i>Seminole Tribe v. Butterworth</i>

Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Butterworth, 658 F.2d 310, was a United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit case that significantly influenced the development of modern Indian Gaming law. In Seminole Tribe, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the State of Florida did not have authority to enforce the Florida Bingo Statute on the Seminole Tribe of Florida's reservation, even though Florida is a Public Law 280 state with special rights to extend criminal and limited civil jurisdiction over Indian Country. Because of the decision, the Seminole Tribe was able to build and operate the nation's first tribally-owned high-stakes bingo parlor on their reservation in Florida, even though bingo for profit was illegal under Florida law at the time. Many other tribes later followed the Seminole Tribe's lead by building their own bingo parlors on their reservations, leading many scholars to call the Seminole Tribe's victory in this case the "birth" of modern commercial gambling on reservations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gambling in Oregon</span>

Gambling in Oregon relates to the laws, regulations, and authorized forms of gambling.

The impact of Native American gaming depends on the tribe and its location. In the 1970s, various tribes took unprecedented action to initiate gaming enterprises. In this groundbreaking revitalization of the Native American economy, they created a series of legal struggles between the federal, state, and tribal governments. Native American gaming has grown from bingo parlors to high-stakes gaming, and is deeply controversial. Disputes include tribal sovereignty, negative impact of gaming, and a loss of Native American culture. The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act was passed in 1988 to secure collaboration between the states and tribes and also for the federal government to oversee gaming operations. Gaming is extremely lucrative for several tribes, but it has also been unsuccessful in some instances.

The Cabazon Band of Cahuilla Indians is a federally recognized tribe of Cahuilla Indians, located in Riverside County, California. They were formerly known as the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Morongo Band of Mission Indians</span> Native Cahuilla and Serrano Indians in Southern California

The Morongo Band of Mission Indians is a federally recognized tribe in California, United States. The main tribal groups are Cahuilla and Serrano. Tribal members also include Cupeño, Luiseño, and Chemehuevi Indians. Although many tribes in California are known as Mission Indians, some, such as those at Morongo, were never a part of the Spanish Missions in California.

Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U.S. 373 (1976), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a state did not have the right to assess a tax on the property of a Native American (Indian) living on tribal land absent a specific Congressional grant of authority to do so.

I. Nelson Rose is an internationally known author and public speaker, and is recognized as one of the world's leading experts on gambling and gaming law. He is currently a Professor Emeritus at Whittier College and a Visiting Professor at the University of Macau. Rose is best known for his internationally syndicated column and 1986 book, Gambling and the Law. To further educate and inform on the subject, he also maintains a comprehensive website, "Gambling and the Law," which can be found at www.gamblingandthelaw.com.

Thomas Norton Tureen is an American lawyer and entrepreneur known for his work with American Indian tribes. While an attorney with the Native American Rights Fund he pioneered the use of the Nonintercourse Act to obtain return of tribal lands lost 180 years earlier and federal recognition for previously non-federally recognized tribes. Tureen successfully litigated Joint Tribal Council of the Passamaquoddy Tribe v. Morton (1975), which established that the federal government has a trust responsibility to protect the land of all tribes, including those not previously recognized. Between 1972 and 1983 he helped obtain federal recognition for and the return of over 300,000 acres to five New England tribes. Tureen's work on behalf of the tiny Mashantucket Pequot Tribe in Connecticut led to the creation of the Foxwoods Resort Casino, one of the largest casinos in the world. He arranged the acquisition of Dragon Cement, New England's only cement producer, by the Passamaquoddy Tribe ; the acquisition of Phoenix Cement by the Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community ; originated 250 MW Moapa Solar, the first utility scale solar project in Indian Country and had lead responsibility for the creation of a partnership controlled by the Morongo Band of Mission Indians that holds an option to acquire a $400 million interest in an electric transmission upgrade in Southern California.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement</span> Indian Land Claims Settlement

The Connecticut Indian Land Claims Settlement was an Indian Land Claims Settlement passed by the United States Congress in 1983. The settlement act ended a lawsuit by the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe to recover 800 acres of their 1666 reservation in Ledyard, Connecticut. The state sold this property in 1855 without gaining ratification by the Senate. In a federal land claims suit, the Mashantucket Pequot charged that the sale was in violation of the Nonintercourse Act that regulates commerce between Native Americans and non-Indians.

Legal forms of gambling in the U.S. state of North Carolina include the North Carolina Education Lottery, three Indian casinos, charitable bingo and raffles, and low-stakes "beach bingo". North Carolina has long resisted expansion of gambling, owing to its conservative Bible Belt culture.

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, 596 U.S. ___ (2022), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with whether the state of Texas could control and regulate gambling on Texan Native American reservations. In a 5–4 decision issued in June 2022, the Court ruled that the Restoration Act bans only gaming activities also banned by the state of Texas.

References

  1. Light, Steven Andrew. "The Cabazon Decision" (PDF). Opening the Door to Indian Gaming – 20 Years Later.
  2. "California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians". 480 U.S. 202 (1987).
  3. "Tribal Crime and Justice". Public Law 280. Office of Justice Programs: National Institute of Justice.
  4. "California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians". 480 U.S. 202 (1987).
  5. "Native American Gaming". National Gambling Impact Study Commission.
  6. "Native American Gaming". National Gambling Impact Study Commission.
  7. Light, Steven Andrew. "The Cabazon Decision" (PDF). Opening the Door to Indian Gaming – 20 Years Later.