A Quick Review of Some of the Developments in the History of Federal Indian Policy

1
A Quick Review of Some of the Developments in the
History of Federal Indian Policy
2
1789 - U.S. Constitution

• Commerce Clause
• Article I, Section 8,
• Clause 3
• To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and
  among the several states, and with the Indian
  tribes

3
1831 1832 MARSHALL TRILOGY

• Johnson v. McIntosh validity of a tribal land
  grant made to private individuals
• Discovery Doctrine
• Indian Title of Occupancy
• Provided that tribes' rights to sovereignty are
  impaired by colonialization but not disregarded
• Held that the federal government alone has the
  right to negotiate for American Indian land

4
MARSHALL TRILOGY (2)

• Cherokee Nation v. Georgia action brought
  against the state of Georgia by the Cherokee
  Nation which sought relief from state
  jurisdiction on tribal lands
• Supreme Court jurisdiction? TribeForeign
  State?
• Described Indian tribes as "domestic dependent
  nations
• Maintained that the federal-tribal relationship
  "resembles that of a ward to his guardian"

5
MARSHALL TRILOGY (3)

• Worcester v. Georgia concerned the application of
  Georgia state law within the Cherokee Nation
• Missionary need a State license to live among the
  Cherokees?
• Held that tribes do not lose their sovereign
  powers by becoming subject to the power of the
  U.S.
• Maintained that only Congress has plenary
  (overriding) power over Indian affairs
• Established that state laws do not apply in
  Indian Country

6
1934

• The Indian Reorganization Act
• (IRA)
• (Wheeler-Howard Act)
• John Collier
• Harold Ickes
• Felix Cohen

7
IRA

• Ended the Allotment Process
• Extended Trust Ownership Indefinitely
• Provided for the Organization or
  Re-Organization of Tribal Governments
• IRA Constitutions

8
1950s

• The Termination Policy
• Public Law 280 (P.L. 83-280 1953)
• Conferred State Criminal Civil Jurisdiction in
  Indian Country in Certain States
• CA, MN, NE, OR, WI AK
• Other States can elect in
• Relocation

9
SELF-DETERMINATION

• 1970 Nixon Policy
• Indian Self-Determination Education Assistance
  Act (P.L. 93-638 1975)
• 638 Contracts with Tribes for the Provision of
  Tribal Programs

10
1980s

• BINGO!
• Florida, New York, Wisconsin

11
Early Gaming Cases

• 1981
• Seminole Tribe v. Butterworth
• 1982
• Barona Group of Mission Indians v. Duffy

12
1987

• California
• v.
• Cabazon Band of Mission Indians
• Civil-Regulatory
• Criminal-Prohibitory

13
1988

• The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
• (IGRA)

14
Gaming Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act
15

• Established 3 classes of gaming.
• Tribes are the 1st line regulators States may
  assist under Class III Compacts.
• NIGC provides oversight.

16
OBJECTIVES OF GAMING REGULATION

• 1) Suitability of those engaged in gaming
  
• 2) Gaming Proceeds Flow to the Intended
  Beneficiaries
• 3) Fairness of Playto Players to
  Gaming Facility

17
establishment of

• independent Federal regulatory authority for
  gaming on Indian lands,
• the establishment of Federal standards for gaming
  on Indian lands, and
• the establishment of a National Indian Gaming
  Commission

18
Overview of the Industry
19
The Indian Gaming Industry

• When the Act was passed in 1988, Indian gaming
  was a 100 Million per year industry, being
  carried on by about 100 Tribes. In 2008, the
  industry consisted of over 240 Tribes conducting
  gaming at over 445 sites and generating gaming
  revenues of more than 26.7 Billion.

20
The Indian Gaming Industry
Continued...

• The industry is extremely diverse, ranging from
  Saturday night bingo games to the worlds largest
  casino.
• Gaming revenues are not evenly distributed.

21
(No Transcript)
22
Growth in Tribal GamingRevenue (in Billions)
23
2008 Gaming Operations Revenues in Millions by
Range
100 to 250, 12
100 to 250 29
24
NIGC Organization Functions
25
National Indian Gaming CommissionFunctional
Organization Chart
26
NIGC GOALS FOR TRIBAL GAMING

• Level Playing Field for All Tribes
• Strengthened Integrity in Tribal Operations
• Credibility of Regulation by Tribes Feds

27
(No Transcript)