Sovereignty and Tribal Gaming

• 1765: Spanish invasion of California, leading to the killing or enslavement of many Native Americans.

• 1789: U.S. Constitution ratified, granting Congress the right to regulate commerce with Indian tribes.

• 1823: SCOTUS hears Johnson v M’Intosh, establishing indigenous land rights via the discovery doctrine.

• 1830: Indian Removal Act passed, allowing for the relocation of Native Americans west of the Mississippi.

• 1831: SCOTUS refuses to hear Cherokee Nation v Georgia, labeling tribes as wards of the United States.

• 1832: SCOTUS hears Worcester v Georgia, affirming federal authority over Indian tribes.

• 1848: Gold discovered in California, leading to the extermination of many Native Americans.

• 1887: Indian General Allotment Act passed, dividing reservations into individual parcels.

• 1923: Indian Citizens Act passed, granting citizenship to Native Americans.

• 1934: Indian Reorganization Act extends privileges and promotes self-governance for tribes.

• 1948: SCOTUS hears Trujillo v Garley, affirming Native Americans' right to vote.

• 1953: Public Law 280 passed, giving states jurisdiction over tribal lands.

• 1968: Indian Civil Rights Act revises Public Law 280, returning jurisdiction to tribes.

• 1978: Indian Child Welfare Act passed, SCOTUS cases affirm tribal sovereignty in membership and legal matters.

• 1979: Seminole Tribe of Florida starts first Indian bingo gaming operation.

• 1987: SCOTUS hears California v Cabazon, allowing gaming on Indian reservations if permitted in the state.

• 1988: Indian Gaming Regulatory Act passed, affirming tribes' rights to gaming under state compacts.

  
  

These events underscore the long history of struggle, adaptation, and progress in the quest for Native American sovereignty and self-determination.

Following is a timeline reviewing the events in American history that have established and defined Native American sovereignty in the United States.  Prior to this, relationships with Indian tribes was maintained through traditional treaty documents that generally allowed for independent governance.

·         1765 The Spanish invade California and kill or enslave a large percentage of the Indian population that had been living there for many thousands of years

·         1789 The U.S. Constitution is ratified, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 gives Congress exclusive right to regulate commerce with Indian tribes

·         1823 The SCOTUS hears Johnson v M’Intosh, outlining indigenous rights to the land vis-à-vis the discovery doctrine

·         1830 Congress passes the Indian Removal Act allowing President Andrew Jackson to begin removing Indians west of the Mississippi

·         1831 The SCOTUS refuses to hear Cherokee Nation v Georgia, and states that Indian tribes are as wards to the United States, not independent nations

·         1832 The SCOTUS hears Worcester v Georgia, reversing course to a degree and stating that only the federal government could deal with Indian tribes

·         1848 Gold is discovered in California and Americans descend on the land, exterminating Indian people to acquire indigenous lands in some cases

·         1887 The Indian General Allotment Act is passed carving up many Indian reservations into parcels, creating patchwork nations

·         1923 The Indian Citizens Act was passed by Congress conferring citizenship onto American Indians

·         1934 The New Deal, in the form of the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934, extended privileges and promoted self-governance for Indian Nations

·         1948 The SCOTUS hears Trujillo v Garley, and prohibits States from interfering with Indians’ right to vote

·         1953 Congress passes Public Law 280 giving many Western States jurisdiction over tribal lands

·         1968 Congress passes the Indian Civil Rights Act revising Public Law 280 returning jurisdiction of tribal affairs to tribes

·         1978 Congress passes the Indian Child Welfare Act, SCOTUS hears Santa Clara v Martinez determining the judiciary cannot interfere with tribal membership issues, and SCOTUS also hears U.S. v Wheeler where the members determined that sovereign tribes were independent in administering their own laws unless Congress otherwise intervenes

·         1979 The Seminole Tribe of Florida are the first tribe to start an Indian bingo gaming operation

·         1987 SCOTUS hears California v Cabazon in which it was decided that States that allow gaming of any type must also allow gaming on Indian reservations

·         1988 the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) was passed by Congress at the behest of the State’s, affirming the rights of tribes to enter the business of gaming, and for high-end (Class III) gaming, only under a compact with the State in which they are located

The 1987 Supreme Court case California v Cabazon was one result of hundreds of years of agitating for the right of self-determination by American Indian tribes.  Effectively overturning States’ bans on Indian gaming, the decision and subsequent passing of the IGRA unleashed a torrent of tribal gaming in California and across the nation.  Mission and other Indians in California immediately entered into compacts with the State as outlined in the IGRA.  The compacts were tribal-to-state agreements that resolved jurisdictional issues but also outlined the business arrangement that tribes would have with the State.  The compacts allowed tribes such as the Morongo and Rumsey Band to enter into development agreements for land, buildings, and consultation for Vegas-style gaming.  This activity completely revitalized tribes across the State by injecting hundreds of millions of dollars in funds into the community.  Tribes are able to build cultural resource centers, schools that dedicate class time to Indian culture, heritage, and language, sanitation, water, and electrical systems to serve their communities, and revive cultural practices that had been nearly lost after two hundred years of poverty.

California is the most populous American Indian cultural area, and not all indigenous tribes enjoy federal recognition.  They are effectively locked out of entering into compacts with the State of California, relegating their gambling and other economic development interests to smaller-scale enterprises.  Some tribes remain mired in poverty, unrecognized and therefore unable to enjoy the benefits conferred on tribes by Congress.  And some tribes, and groups of tribes, have opted out of renegotiating compacts with State, recognizing that the jurisdictional and taxation parameters of the agreements effectively cede certain aspects of tribal sovereignty to the State.  In the case of the California tribes and Mission Indians, gaming enterprises have created highly-charged fights between white Americans and indigenous people.  The tribes have set up community economic development groups with local governments to find solutions to conflicts that arise from Indian gaming activities.  The IGRA and resultant tribe-to-State agreements have had a wide array of impact on tribes depending on their recognition status, location, and the surrounding non-Indian community members.

Along the shores of Puget Sound, the Suquamish Nation has built the Clearwater Casino and Resort.  It was just a large walk-in tent in 2000 as the tribe began flexing its muscles to exercise sovereignty over traditional lands in the area following successful acquisition of funding.  Today the complex is a sprawling modern facility, boasting two resorts, a multi-story car garage, and a major Class III gaming operation.  The tribe has been able to build an entirely new housing addition for members, buy back and reclaim hundreds of acres of surrounding land, buy and construct new tribal government facilities and business resources, expand its education and wellness programs, and, recently, entirely revitalize the downtown waterfront complete with a beautiful new longhouse.  Today at Suquamish Shores, people can shop and play in a community that is quickly revitalizing, and even take in traditional storytelling and ceremonies at the annual summer gathering open to the public.  Just like the California peoples, the Suquamish are acting on the window of opportunity afforded by IGPRA and other precedents to gather resources for their members now.  As the history of American Indian law indicates, the courts and the people sway to-and-fro between implementing the original treaty-bound language of the courts and the fickle local politics arguing for non-Indian jurisdiction over traditional lands.  Gaming is just another resource that American Indians have developed and collected through time that many Americans are willing to take, again.