BIG LAGOON RANCHERIA v. California

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S CROSS-MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Docket Nos. 80 and 93)

Over the past several years, Plaintiff Big Lagoon Ranchería (Big Lagoon or the Tribe) has sought to enter into a tribal-state compact with Defendant State of California that permits it to conduct class III gaming. The Tribe alleges that the State has negotiated in bad faith. Big Lagoon moves for summary judgment and an order directing the State to negotiate in good faith, under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701 , et seq. The State opposes the motion and cross-moves for summary judgment. The motions were heard on August 12, 2010. Having considered oral argument and the papers submitted by the parties, the Court GRANTS Big Lagoon’s motion and DENIES the State’s cross-motion.

BACKGROUND

I. Legal Background

In enacting IGRA in 1988, Congress created a statutory framework for the operation and regulation of gaming by Indian tribes. See 25 U.S.C. § 2702 . IGRA provides that Indian tribes may conduct certain gaming activities only if au thorized pursuant to a valid compact between the tribe and the state in which the gaming…