State of Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene Tribe

Good Law
794 F.3d 1039·2015 WL 4461055·2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12634
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 22, 201514-35753California3,461 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hawkins, J.

The Coeur d’Alene Tribe (“Tribe”) appeals the preliminary injunction prohibiting the Tribe from offering Texas Hold’em (“Hold’em”) poker. The Tribe argues that tribal sovereign immunity was not abrogated and that venue was improper under the terms of the Tribal-State Gaming Compact (“Compact”). We affirm because the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”) severed tribal immunity and the Compact did not bar the litigation. Lastly, we affirm the grant of injunctive relief because the district court’s findings were not clearly erroneous.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

As this appeal hinges on the regulation of Indian gaming, we begin with a brief introduction to the IGRA. Congress passed the IGRA in 1988 “in order to provide a statutory basis for the operation and regulation of gaming by Indian tribes.” Seminole Tribe of Fla. v. Florida, 517 U.S. 44, 48 , 116 S.Ct. 1114 , 134 L.Ed.2d 252 (1996). “The Act divides gaming on Indian lands into three classes—I, II, and III—and provides a different regulatory scheme for each class.” Id. “Non-banking” card games (including poker) can be either Class II or Class III gaming, depending on the laws of the state in which the gaming…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.