This regulatory regime is comprehensive, and occupies the entire field of gaming on Indian lands. See Tamiami Partners, Ltd. v. Miccosukee Tribe of Indians , 63 F.3d 1030, 1033 (11th Cir. 1995) (noting that IGRA was “intended to expressly preempt the field in the governance of gaming activities on Indian lands” (quoting S. Rep. No. 100-446, at 6 (Aug. 3, 1988))); Gaming Corp. of Am. v. Dorsey & Whitney , 88 F.3d 536, 547 (8th Cir. 1996). IGRA’s implementing regulations define “Class III Gaming” to include “[a]ny sports betting and parimutuel wagering including but not limited to wagering on horse racing, dog racing or jai alai.” 25 C.F.R. § 502.4(c). While the term “sports betting” is not defined within IGRA or its implementing regulations, 2 it is generally understood to mean: [T]he staking or risking by any person of something of value upon the outcome of . . . a sporting event . . . upon an agreement or understanding that the person or another person will receive something of value in the event of a certain outcome. 31 U.S.C. § 5362(1)(A) (defining “bet or wager” under the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (“UIGEA”)) (emphasis added). This is precisely what
2 See Letter from Kevin K. Washburn, General Counsel for NIGC, to Joseph M. Speck, Nic-A-Bob Productions, re: WIN Sports Betting Game (Mar. 13, 2001), available at https://www.nigc.gov/images/uploads/game- opinions/WIN%20Sports%20Betting%20Game-Class%20III.pdf (“Because sports betting does not fit into any of the specifically defined categories of Class II gaming set forth above, it is a Class III form of gaming.”).
4
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs