8/10/22
Compacts Under IGRA
■ If a tribes wants to engage in Class III gaming, it must request a compact with any state in which is seeks a gaming presence. ■ Congress intended to balance state and tribal interests through negotiated and shared state and tribal regulation and jurisdiction over Class III gaming. ■ Section 3A of IGRA outlines the specific instructions for the process of developing a compact. – IGRA gives states a role in Class III gaming by requiring tribes and states to negotiate compacts before a tribe may offer Class III gaming – IGRA details the procedures that states and tribes must follow in negotiating compacts and includes possible negotiation subjects
3
Brief History of Indian Gaming and State Regulation ■ The first major case to deal with Indian gaming and state regulation is California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987). – The U.S. Supreme Court held that California did not have the right to regulate gaming unless there were criminal prohibitions against gaming in the state. – States are rarely permitted to regulate tribal gaming and may only do so with federal preemption. – With this ruling, the Court required Congress to implement explicit legislation for any state regulation of Indian gaming.
4
2
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs