Redrant alert: This is obviously a "stretch" but it might be a ruling worth watching. With a decision by the Florida Supreme Court it is ripe for an appeal to the US Supreme Court.
I'm not a lawyer but this story seems to reaffirm my understanding that Indian Casinos can only have "gambling" (regulated?) activities otherwise allowed in the state. Minnesota basically got heavily into the Indian Casino business because it allowed charitable "Casino Nights". The "Casino Nights" were limited to a couple of times per year and had limited betting allowed. The court focused on the core activity of "casino nights".
Indian reservations have very restricted ability to engage in activities illegal outside the reservation. As an example, Peyote is allowed allowed only in highly structured religious, ceremonies not for an "peyote cafe" open to the public on the reservation. The same goes for tobacco use in something like highly structured Native American religious activities in prisons. Both use the same highly structured situation. You can't be a "honky" in the "wannabee" tribe. and use peyote on a reservation or tobacco in prison.
Smoking is a "regulated vice". Rather arcane example of how reservations need to conform to the laws of the state concerning vice might involve nuclear waste and prostitution. I do believe our Prairie Island Nuclear plant is located on or adjacent to a reservation but this has had no effect on spent nuclear fuel rod storage. There have been a number of proposals for nuclear fuel rod storage on tribal land but all have failed.
Another on might be brothels on Indian land. None exist. The same with so-called strip-shows. Minnesota, for example has very strict rules on physical contact between the "dancers" and customers. I know of no reservation in the US that has this so there are limits to tribal sovereignty. The court challenges to trial sovereignty have been somewhat limited but there are occasionally get racial discrimination and sexual harassment complaints. With the most egregious ones "tribal sovereignty" is claimed as a defense.
Smoking in indoor public access casinos might make a good case here. Indoor smoke has been deemed a "public health" issue where the goal is protect the employees. In the case of the casinos the vast majority are not native American and in other legal matters the courts have consistently ruled that the regular justice system has jurisdiction oversight over non tribal members in the tribal legal system.
Since the Florida case involves the a decision by the Florida Supreme Court the only appeal would appear to be the US Supreme Court. A friend of the court certeria could be filed in regard to the alleged discriminatory indoor smoking regulations on and off the reservations related to Casino compacts. In Supreme Court deliberations this could take a year or more to resolve.
Basically, if already unpopular smoking lost here it could open the door to other challenges on reservation sovernty. Time will tell. Greg Lang
By BRENDAN FARRINGTON, Associated Press WriterThu Jul 3, 3:09 PM ET
The Florida Supreme Court on Thursday overturned an agreement Gov. Charlie Crist signed with the Seminole Tribe to expand gambling at its casinos, saying the governor had no right to allow games that are illegal elsewhere in the state.
The November deal allowed the tribe to install Las Vegas-style slot machines and games such as blackjack and baccarat at their seven casinos, including the Hard Rock Casinos in Hollywood and Tampa. But Crist overstepped his authority, the court ruled.
"The governor does not have authority to legalize in some parts of the state, or for some persons, conduct that is otherwise illegal throughout the state," the opinion said.
The opinion doesn't take issue with the slot machines, which are also legal at Broward and Miami-Dade County jai-alai frontons and horse and dog tracks, but rather with the table card games.
"What is legal in Florida is legal on tribal lands, and what is illegal in Florida is illegal there. Absent a compact, any gambling prohibited in the state is prohibited on tribal land," the opinion said.
But the tribe contends that it is operating under a federally approved compact which gives it authority for the games. The tribe has installed Vegas-style slots in six of its seven casinos and began blackjack games at its Hollywood casino on June 22.
"The tribe is studying the decision and plans no immediate change in any of the games that are offered," said spokesman Gary Bitner. "We want people to know that if they come to any of the casinos in the state this weekend for the holiday, that they can play."
The agreement gave the tribe exclusive rights to the card games. In exchange, the tribe gave Florida $50 million when Crist, a Republican, signed the compact. The state was to receive another $175 million over the next two years, $150 million for the third year of the agreement and at least $100 million a year for the remainder of the 25-year deal.
House Speaker Marco Rubio challenged Crist's authority to sign the agreement and asked the Supreme Court for an opinion. Senate President Ken Pruitt later joined the challenge.
Crist's office didn't immediately return a call and an e-mail seeking comment. Rubio and Pruitt, both Republicans, praised the decision.
"The court's decision is a victory for our constitutional system of checks and balances," Rubio said. "I look forward to an open and deliberative process that results in a new compact that doesn't unnecessarily expand gambling in our state."
Pruitt said, "For the Senate, this case was about protecting the important concept of separation of powers. We are pleased with the Supreme Court's decision upholding the Legislature's sole authority to make law."
Both local and out-of-town gamblers expressed disappointment with the ruling.
"Think about it, what's a casino without blackjack," said Michael LaBella, 37, who was visiting the casino Thursday on business from El Paso, Texas. "I hate to say this, but compared to Vegas and Atlantic City, Florida has a long way to go."
Robert Dennis, 56, a blackjack lover from Miami, said the court's decision doesn't make sense.
"What is the big deal of getting rid of these games," Dennis said. "With the economy how it is, having more games would only help."
___
Associated Press writer Damian Grass in Hollywood contributed to this report.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment