Indian Gaming Now

This week, an editorial in the Los Angeles Times ran with this headline: "A Bad Bet on Indian Casinos."  The editorial called on Governor Jerry Brown to reject two applications for casinos on newly acquired lands, as well as for "changes in federal law . . . to deter this from happening again."

Various casino projects on newly acquired lands in Michigan are pushing the envelope in both law and politics.  Jurist offers this student commentary, titled "Michigan's Off-Reservation Casino Battle."

Our second appearance in the New York Times inside of a week, as Kathryn is quoted in a very interesting article on the Shakopee in Minnesota:  $1 Million Each Year for All, as Long as Tribe's Luck Holds, Timothy Williams, New York Times, August 9, 2012.  Here's Kathryn's quote:

Kathryn is quoted in this in-depth Washington Post article on tribal gaming in Washington state, "Competition for Casino Profits Complicates Indian Tribe’s Effort to Gain Federal Recognition."

Here's a short excerpt from the article:

Steve is quoted in this August 4 New York Times article on tribal gaming in California.

The article, "Lucrative Gambling Pits Tribe Against Tribe," details so-called "reservation shopping" among California tribes as some work to develop casinos on newly acquired lands.  Steve is quoted about the shift in politics to inter-tribal competition:

The discussion draft version of the Tribal Online Gaming Act (TOGA) bill is available here.

Note the role of a new Office of Tribal Online Gaming in the Commerce Department, as well as the new legal term of art, "tribal online gaming," as distinct from Indian gaming under IGRA.

As more states are poised to legalize Internet gaming, tribes are asking for preemptive federal legislation that will appropriately protect tribal interests.  State legislation predictably treats online gambling as a commercial activity; while not barring tribes from seeking state licenses like any other commercial operator, there is no recognition or protection of tribes' status as governments, either.  (And that's not necessarily inappropriate, as states do not have independent authority to regulate federally recognized tribes.)  Even prior federal bills, though, did not pay much attention to tribal sovereignty.  Unlike the 1988 Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which was focused on strong tribal governments and tribal economic development, tribes have been an afterthough