Living Law,
Living LandSupport land rights

Court case

Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas

In 2022 the Court held the Restoration Act bans on the Pueblo's lands only gaming that Texas also bans, not gaming Texas regulates.

Citation
596 U.S. 685 (2022), No. 20-493
Court
U.S. Supreme Court
Year
2022
Nations
Ysleta del Sur Pueblo (Tigua)
Treaty at issue
none (Restoration Act of 1987)
Holding
The Restoration Act bars gaming on the Pueblo's lands only where Texas law wholly prohibits the activity; IGRA otherwise governs. 5-4 (Gorsuch).
Effect on land rights
advanced

What happened

In 1968 Congress recognized the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo as an Indian tribe and assigned its trust responsibilities to Texas. In 1983 Texas renounced those responsibilities as inconsistent with the State's Constitution, and said it opposed any new federal trust law that did not let it apply its own gaming laws on tribal lands.

Congress restored the Tribe's federal trust status in 1987 with the Ysleta del Sur and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act. Section 107 says that "gaming activities which are prohibited by [Texas law] are hereby prohibited on the reservation and on lands of the tribe," but denies Texas "civil or criminal regulatory jurisdiction." Soon after, Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), which lets tribes offer bingo, a class II game, in states that permit such gaming for any purpose by anyone.

In 2016 the Tribe began offering bingo, including electronic bingo machines. Texas sued to shut down all of its bingo operations. The district court and the Fifth Circuit sided with Texas, holding that the bingo operations were impermissible because they did not follow Texas's bingo regulations.

On June 15, 2022, the Supreme Court vacated that ruling, 5-4. Justice Gorsuch wrote that "The Restoration Act bans as a matter of federal law on tribal lands only those gaming activities also banned in Texas." Texas admits it allows bingo "according to rule[s]," which makes its laws regulatory rather than prohibitory. Chief Justice Roberts dissented, joined by Justices Thomas, Alito and Kavanaugh.

Summarized with AI assistance from 3 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error

What the sources say, and how this was checked

Well supported by the sources below.

  1. The Restoration Act bans as a matter of federal law on tribal lands only those gaming activities also banned in Texas.Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, 596 U.S. 685 (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinion)
  2. Congress restored the Tribe’s federal trust status in 1987Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, 596 U.S. 685 (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinion)
  3. In 2016, the Tribe began to offer bingo, including “electronic bingo” machinesYsleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas, 596 U.S. 685 (2022) (Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinion)

Research notes. The reporter cite 596 U.S. 685 on the page is not in the slip opinion (596 U.S. ___); No. 20-493, the date and the 5-4 vote are confirmed. The old closing sentence comparing the ruling to Cabazon was removed as the writer's own.

Who is doing the work

Native legal and land defense, nationally

Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.

Connections

Links marked “suggested” were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.

Doctrine applied 3

Policy era 1

Nations named 1

Sources

  1. supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/596/20-493/legal text copy
Kind
Court case
Confidence
High

Correct this record