Case: 3:25-cv-00698-wmc Document #: 56-1 Filed: 01/06/26 Page 13 of 13
Second, the Nation’s tribal gaming ordinance also prohibits Defendants’ gaming activity. Specifically, the Nation’s tribal gaming ordinance expressly prohibits class III gaming that is not authorized by the Compact. See 5 HCC § 5(A), ECF No. 41-6 at 12. It further prohibits any gaming for which the Nation does not have the sole proprietary interest or responsibility. Id. § 6(A). Here, as discussed, Defendants’ sports-betting activity is neither authorized by the Nation’s Gaming Ordinance nor its Compact, which incorporates the provisions of the Gaming Ordinance. Defendants’ sports-betting activity is therefore prohibited by the Nation’s tribal gaming ordinance. Accordingly, because the Compact does not (and, indeed, cannot) authorize Defendants’ sports-betting activity that occurs on the Nation’s tribal lands and the Nation’s tribal gaming ordinance expressly prohibit it, Defendants’ sports-betting activity is unlawful. As such, the Nation has the authority to enjoin Defendants’ conduct from occurring on their tribal lands. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Tribal Amici respectfully request that the Court grant the Nation’s motion for preliminary injunction. DATED: January 6, 2026 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Joseph H. Webster Joseph H. Webster ( pro hac vice pending) Elizabeth A. Bower
Jens W. Camp ( pro hac vice pending) Hobbs, Straus, Dean & Walker LLP 1899 L Street NW, Suite 1200 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 822-8282
jwebster@hobbsstraus.com ebower@hobbsstraus.com jcamp@hobbsstraus.com Counsel for Tribal Amici
13
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs