Coeur D'Alene Tribe, and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho Nez Perce Tribe v. State of Idaho
COEUR D’ALENE TRIBE, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Kootenai Tribe of Idaho; Nez Perce Tribe, Plaintiffs, v. STATE OF IDAHO, Defendant-Appellee
Opinion
ORDER The judgment of the district court is affirmed substantially for the reasoning advanced in its published opinion, 842 F.Supp. 1268 (Idaho 1994). Our affirmation also is based, in part, on our holding in Rumsey Indian Rancheria of Wintun Indians v. Wilson, 41 F.3d 421 (9th Cir.1994).
In Rumsey, we held that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, 25 U.S.C. § 2710 (d)(1)(B), permits Class III gaming activities on Indian lands “only if such activities are ... located in a State that permits such gaming for any purpose_”
Id.
at 425 . Thus, we concluded that where a state does not permit gaming activities sought by a tribe, “the tribe has no right to engage in those activities, and the state ... has no duty to negotiate with respect to them.”
Id.
In so concluding, we cited with approval Judge Ryan’s well-reasoned opinion in the instant case.
Id.
at 427 .
Because Idaho does not permit Class III gaming activities, we hold that the Coeur D’Alene Tribe has no right to engage in those activities.
AFFIRMED.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals1
- Federal District Courts1
- State Appellate Courts2
- State Attorney General Opinions2
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.