Case: 25-7516, 01/30/2026, DktEntry: 49.2, Page 12 of 41
siphon gaming revenues from tribal and state governments; and diminish tribal self-determination. Accordingly, this Court should affirm the lower court’s decision to dissolve the preliminary injunction. ARGUMENT I. Congress Did Not Impliedly Repeal IGRA. A. IGRA’s Structure In IGRA, Congress explicitly stated that no class III gaming can occur on “Indian lands” unless it is authorized by the tribal government and is in a state that permits such gaming. 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d). Class III gaming—including sports betting—is authorized on Indian lands only where tribes and states have entered into a compact or procedures prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior to regulate that gaming. 25 U.S.C. §§ 2710(d)(1), 2710(d)(7)(B)(vii); see also 25 C.F.R. § 502.4(c). The Secretary of the Interior must review and approve these agreements in order for them to take effect, and for lawful class III gaming to occur on tribal lands. 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d)(8). These core provisions have remained unchanged since 1988. Under this regime, regulation of class III gaming on Indian lands is shared between three sovereign governments: tribes, states, and the federal government. Congress carefully crafted this comprehensive statutory regime to advance clearly
5
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs