Case: 3:25-cv-00698 Document #: 1 Filed: 08/20/25 Page 11 of 47
criminal sanctions” to Indian country). See also Coeur D’Alene Tribe v. State , 842 F. Supp. 1268, 1282 (D. Idaho 1994) (“Accordingly, the court finds that in the absence of a tribal gaming ordinance and a compact, neither the Tribe nor any non-tribal entity … may conduct Class III gaming on the reservation.”). 35. Any class II or class III gaming conducted by a third-party management company on Indian lands on behalf of a tribe with a compact must meet the strict requirements of IGRA, 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d)(9) and 25 U.S.C. § 2711, in order to conduct that gaming. Further, any contract authorizing a third-party management company to conduct gaming on Indian lands on behalf of a tribe must be approved by the Chairman of the NIGC. Id . See also 25 C.F.R. § 533. 36. IGRA provides tribes an enforcement mechanism to prevent gaming from being conducted on Indian lands that is not authorized by a tribal-state compact. “The United States district courts shall have jurisdiction over . . . any cause of action initiated by a State or Indian tribe to enjoin a class III gaming activity located on Indian lands and conducted in violation of any Tribal-State compact entered into under [IGRA] that is in effect . . . .” 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d)(7)(A)(ii). THE HO-CHUNK NATION’S COMPREHENSIVE REGULATION OF GAMING A. The Nation’s Regulation of Gaming Under Its Compact. 37. The Nation is authorized to conduct class III gaming, including sports wagering, on its Indian Lands pursuant to a class-III gaming compact. The Nation entered into its Compact with the State in 1992, and it has been subsequently extended four times. 38. The Compact affords the Nation primary responsibility for the regulation of its gaming facilities and activities to ensure the fairness of the playing of the class III games, to shield the games from criminal activity, to ensure that the
11
QB\168080.00083\98102991.1
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs