Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians v. State

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 9, 2007

SAN PASQUAL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS, A FEDERALLY RECOGNIZED INDIAN TRIBE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CALIFORNIA AN AGENCY OF THE STATE FOR CALIFORNIA, AND CURIAE BRIEF ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, AS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, [DKT NOS. 21, 22] DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Larry Alan Burns

ORDER(1) GRANTING CALIFORNIA NATIONS INDIAN GAMING ASSOCIATION LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF; and (2) DENYING RINCON BAND OF LUISENO MISSION INDIANS GAMBLING CONTROL COMMISSION, LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS

Plaintiff San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians ("San Pasqual") sues the State of California, the California Gambling Control Commission, and the state Governor in this action seeking a judicial determination of the correct number of gaming device licenses authorized in the aggregate by the State Aggregate Limit formula contained in the 1999 Tribal-State Gaming Compact between San Pasqual and the State. Defendants have filed a Motion To Dismiss plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. ("Rule") 12(b)(7) and Rule 19, calendared to be heard January 22, 2007, alleging all other Compact signatory tribes are necessary and indispensable parties to this action but have not been joined, and purportedly cannot be joined because of their sovereign immunity from suit.

The California Nations Indian Gaming Association ("CNIGA") and the Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indians ("Rincon") separately move for leave to file amicus curiae briefs. CNIGA represents it is a non-profit organization comprised of 68 federally-recognized Indian tribal governments with Indian lands in California, with its core mission to defend tribal government authority in Indian Country within California. It describes its goals as seeking to preserve opportunities to promote tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments, as envisaged by Congress in enacting the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act ("IGRA"), 25 U.S.C. §§ 701-21. The IGRA authorized tribal-state gaming compacts such as the one at issue in this litigation.

In consideration of this court's Standing Order regarding leave to file amicus curiae briefs, CNIGA has made a persuasive showing that the reasoning in Voices For Choices v. Illinois Bell Telephone Co., 339 F.3d 542 (7th Cir. 2003), adopted as this court's standard for deciding whether to permit the filing of amicus curiae briefs, applied to these circumstances, warrants consideration of the perspectives CNIGA brings to the issues presented in defendants' Motion. Accordingly, CNIGA's request is GRANTED.

In contrast, Rincon's request for leave to file its own amicus curiae brief does not persuade the court Rincon's contribution to the briefing of the issues would be other than cumulative. CNIGA lists Rincon as a member tribe, as is San Pasqual, so that Rincon's perspectives are adequately represented by San Pasqual and by amicus curiae CNIGA. Accordingly, Rincon's request is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20070109

© 1992-2007 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.