Case: 25-7187, 03/10/2026, DktEntry: 75.1, Page 14 of 43
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 tribe 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 (“Secretary”) 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 must review and approve these agreements. 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 tribes, states, and the federal government. Congress carefully crafted this comprehensive statutory regime to advance clearly articulated policy goals to: (1) “promot[e] tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments”; (2) “provide a statutory basis for regulation” that protects tribes’ ability to be the primary beneficiary of gaming on their lands; and (3) create a federal regulatory agency to adopt federal standards and protect tribal gaming as a means of generating tribal revenue. 25 U.S.C. § 2702. Congress made it abundantly clear that tribes—not private entities—must benefit from any gaming
6
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs