Redding Rancheria loses litigation over casino application

Friday, February 24, 2012  

The Redding Rancheria of California won't be able to open a second casino under a federal judge's ruling that was issued last week.

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 bars gaming on newly acquired lands. However, Section 20 of the law provides an exception for tribes that were restored to federal recognition.

The Redding Rancheria claimed 230 acres of newly acquired lands qualified for the exception. But in 2010, the Interior Department said the tribe failed to show a "temporal connection" to the property.

According to Section 20 regulations, a temporal connection can be shown if:

(1) The land is included in the tribe's first request for newly acquired lands since the tribe was restored to Federal recognition; or
(2) The tribe submitted an application to take the land into trust within 25 years after the tribe was restored to Federal recognition and the tribe is not gaming on other lands.

Interior said the tribe had already benefited from the exception twice since regaining federal recognition in 1984 so the land wasn't part of a "first request." Additionally, the parcels were purchased in 2004 and 2010, so the 25-year test would not have covered the 2010 parcel.

The temporal connection also depends on a tribe conducting gaming on "no other lands" under the Section 20 regulations. The tribe already operates a casino, Interior noted.

The tribe went to court to fight the decision but Judge Samuel Conti ruled in favor of the Obama administration last week. He said the tribe failed to show why Interior was wrong and also failed to show that the Section 20 regulations went beyond the intent of Congress.

An appeal is possible. Conti is "just wrong," the tribe's lawyer told The Redding Record-Searchlight.

Get the Story:
Redding Rancheria loses federal lawsuit; tribe sought casino application (The Redding Record-Searchlight 2/24)

District Court Decision:
Redding Rancheria v. Salazar (February 16, 2012)