Norton

Artichoke Joe's California Grand Casino v. Norton

Good Law
353 F.3d 712·2003 WL 22998116
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitDecember 22, 2003No. 02-16508California14,425 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Graber, J.

Plaintiffs are California card clubs and charities that are prohibited under California state law from offering casino-style gaming. They challenge the validity of compacts entered into under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2721 , between the State of California and certain Indian tribes. Pursuant to an amendment to the California Constitution that permits casino-style gaming only on Indian lands (“Proposition 1A”), California has entered into 62 compacts (“Tribal-State Compacts”) with Indian tribes allowing such gaming. Plaintiffs brought this action, in federal district court, against various state defendants 1 and the Secretary and Assistant Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, alleging that Proposition 1A and the Tribal-State Compacts violate IGRA and their rights to equal protection guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

The district court granted summary judgment to both the state defendants and the federal defendants. Because we hold that Proposition 1A and the Tribal-State Compacts are consistent with IGRA and do not violate the guarantees of equal protection, we affirm.

BACKGROUND

A. The Indian 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.