- Court: United States Supreme Court
- Area(s) of Law: Tribal Law
- Date Filed: June 15, 2022
- Case #: 20–493
- Judge(s)/Court Below: GORSUCH, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BREYER, SOTOMAYOR, KAGAN, and BARRETT, JJ., joined. ROBERTS, C. J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which THOMAS, ALITO, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined.
- Full Text Opinion
Respondent attempted to enforce a state gambling ban on Bingo except under proscribed circumstances on tribal land based on Ysleta del Sur and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act, 101 Stat. 666 (Restoration Act). Petitioner filed a complaint in Federal District Court, arguing 25 U. S. C. § 2701 et seq. allowed tribes to offer Bingo, a “class II” game, on tribal land in any state which allowed the game “for any purpose by any person, organization or entity.” The District Court ruled for Respondent based on Fifth Circuit precedent. The Fifth Circuit affirmed. On appeal, the Supreme Court held that the Restoration Act does not turn “state gaming laws . . . [into] . . . surrogate federal law on tribal lands.” The Court reasoned that based on plain and non-conflicting readings of statutory text, as well as the Restoration Act and § 2701’s use of language articulated in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians, 480 U. S. 202 (1987), where state law otherwise “regulates” specific game activity, Respondent may not “prohibit” the same game on tribal land. Congress chose to only federalize state gambling laws on tribal land that fully prohibit the games. Reversed and remanded.