![\"Indian](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Indian_Gaming_image_2.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nIn the late 1800s, the remaining Native American tribes were\nmoved (often against their will) to land set aside for them by the federal\ngovernment. These \u2018Indian reservations\u2019 were a form of settlement with the\nNative American tribes, whereby they would allegedly be \u2018left in peace\u2019 to\npursue their ways of life. However, as the European way of life decimated\nNative American ways, these sparse lands were a minor Band-Aid applied to a\nmajor wound.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The only way a reservation system would work was for the\nfederal government to organize and establish reservations within the home\nterritories of each tribe. Since federal authority is higher than state\nauthority on national matters and Constitutional rights, all Indian\nreservations in all 50 states are designated as federal land. And with the land\ncomes certain sovereign rights for the Native American inhabitants. However,\nfor the tribal nations to be truly sovereign, they would need to have the right\nto self-government, which is clearly not the case. When the rights of\nindividual states, reservations, and federal law clash, the Supreme Court often\nsteps in to settle matters.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Sovereign Tribal Territories<\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"Indian](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Indian_Gaming_image_3.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nThe trouble with any kind of segregation is that it never\nworks, and always creates ghettos and pockets of poverty-stricken people who\nlive outside of society\u2019s advantages. In order to respect the cultural\nintegrity of various tribes, the federal government granted them limited sovereignty\non their own reservations<\/a>. This meant that no state authority could\nregulate the reservations or otherwise govern them. Since most of the tribal\nreservations are located in remote lands away from big city economies, tribal poverty\nincreased. Native Americans remain the most impoverished and underprivileged\nminority community in the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\nBut a loophole in the law changed the destiny of many Native\nAmericans: they are not restricted or bound by state law. That means that if a\nstate bans gambling (as most of them do), they cannot ban gambling on sovereign\ntribal land, as it technically does not belong to the state. It took a lot of\nyears in the court system for Indian gaming to establish itself, but it all\nstarted with one case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Bryan v. Itasca County<\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"tribal](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Indian_Gaming_image_4.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nIn the 1970s, a married Chippewa Indian couple named Russell\nand Helen Bryan lived in a mobile home located on an Indian reservation in\nMinnesota. One day they received a property tax bill from Itasca County. Since\nthey had never received a property tax bill before, they sought legal advice\nand eventually went to court, refusing to pay the unlawful tax. The Bryans lost\ntheir court case in both the state district court and Minnesota Supreme Court.\nBut when they brought their case to the United States Supreme Court, things got\ninteresting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Under federal authority, the United States Supreme Court\ndecides the most important matters affecting the lives of the people of the\nUnited States. Important decisions made on this level have sweeping\nimplications for all involved, and often change previous interpretations of\nConstitutional law. In the landmark case of Bryan v. Itasca\nCounty<\/a>, Supreme Court Justice Brennan ruled in favor of the Bryans, and in\nso doing, changed the fate of many tribes forever. The ruling states that not\nonly does a U.S. state have absolutely no rights to impose taxes on individuals\nliving on Indian reservations, they cannot regulate any behavior or decisions\nmade on these reservations either. From that one case, the stage was set for\nthe first tribal casinos.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe Seminole Tribe of Florida<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
In the 70s, not long after the ground-breaking Bryan case,\nthe Seminole Tribe of Florida set up a high-stakes bingo hall on their\nreservation land outside of Fort Lauderdale. The local sheriff threatened\narrests if the tribe opened the bingo hall. The Seminole Tribe sought\u2014and\nreceived\u2014legal protection from the courts. After several district court cases,\nthe Seminoles were allowed to continue their bingo operations based on the\nruling in the Bryan case. Soon the Seminoles opened additional bingo halls, and\neventually expanded into full-fledged casinos, and ultimately, the ownership of\none of the world\u2019s most recognized brands, the Hard Rock Caf\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Tribal Casino Expansion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n![\"Indian](\"\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/06\/Indian_Gaming_image_5-1.jpg\")
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nThe tribal gaming controversy came to a head when police shut down gambling halls and arrested members of the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians near Indio, California. The tribe sued and won their case, and were allowed to continue their gaming operations. Ongoing clashes between local authorities and various tribes led to Congressional action. In 1988, Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act<\/a> (IGRA), signed by President Ronald Reagan. This furthered the power of tribes to open casino-like halls and expand their gaming activities, in a bid to reduce federal aid to reservations and encourage economic self-sufficiency. The law came with a price, though. The federal government would have ultimate authority over regulating the gaming activities of the tribe.<\/p>\n\n\n\nThe IGRA allowed the tribes to keep their sovereignty, but\nallowed a sort of mixed sovereignty with the federal government when it\nspecifically involves gambling. The biggest reason for this was to allow for\nthe regulation of tribal gaming for economic development, and to protect against\nnegative influences like organized crime. In order for tribal casinos to expand\nfurther, various acts and laws have been passed to allow for an increase in\ngaming activities, from simple bingo halls to full-blown casinos. But the\nbattle for the growth of tribal gaming has been met with much opposition.\nIndividual states have argued against the negative effects of gambling on\ncommunities\u2014on and off reservations. Also, the increasing revenues of tribal casinos\nhas started to worry the big boys in Vegas, Atlantic City, and elsewhere. They\ndon\u2019t want the competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Blowback<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Owners of traditional casinos, most notably former-casino\nmogul Donald Trump, have loudly stated publicly that tribal casinos are overrun\nby organized crime. The FBI has refuted these claims, stating that they have\nseen no evidence of organized crime involvement in tribal gaming. Additional\nopposition comes in the form of state legal action against different types of\ncasino expansion. As the tribal casinos expanded, the revenue generated allowed\ntribes to purchase additional land in which to expand. Many states continue to fight\nover the rights of tribes to buy state land for gambling purposes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Effects of Indian Gaming on Native American Communities<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
As of 2011, there were 460 gambling operations run by 240\ntribes with a total annual revenue of $27 billion. And this number continues to\ngrow as new tribal casinos open on a regular basis. The amount of tribal land\nis not distributed evenly, so some states have larger amounts of reservation\nland upon which to build. Oklahoma has 113 tribal casinos, more than any other\nstate in the U.S. However, there are 562 federally recognized tribes in the\nUnited States, many of which have chosen not to run casinos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nThe trouble with any kind of segregation is that it never\nworks, and always creates ghettos and pockets of poverty-stricken people who\nlive outside of society\u2019s advantages. In order to respect the cultural\nintegrity of various tribes, the federal government granted them limited sovereignty\non their own reservations<\/a>. This meant that no state authority could\nregulate the reservations or otherwise govern them. Since most of the tribal\nreservations are located in remote lands away from big city economies, tribal poverty\nincreased. Native Americans remain the most impoverished and underprivileged\nminority community in the United States.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But a loophole in the law changed the destiny of many Native\nAmericans: they are not restricted or bound by state law. That means that if a\nstate bans gambling (as most of them do), they cannot ban gambling on sovereign\ntribal land, as it technically does not belong to the state. It took a lot of\nyears in the court system for Indian gaming to establish itself, but it all\nstarted with one case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the 1970s, a married Chippewa Indian couple named Russell\nand Helen Bryan lived in a mobile home located on an Indian reservation in\nMinnesota. One day they received a property tax bill from Itasca County. Since\nthey had never received a property tax bill before, they sought legal advice\nand eventually went to court, refusing to pay the unlawful tax. The Bryans lost\ntheir court case in both the state district court and Minnesota Supreme Court.\nBut when they brought their case to the United States Supreme Court, things got\ninteresting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under federal authority, the United States Supreme Court\ndecides the most important matters affecting the lives of the people of the\nUnited States. Important decisions made on this level have sweeping\nimplications for all involved, and often change previous interpretations of\nConstitutional law. In the landmark case of Bryan v. Itasca\nCounty<\/a>, Supreme Court Justice Brennan ruled in favor of the Bryans, and in\nso doing, changed the fate of many tribes forever. The ruling states that not\nonly does a U.S. state have absolutely no rights to impose taxes on individuals\nliving on Indian reservations, they cannot regulate any behavior or decisions\nmade on these reservations either. From that one case, the stage was set for\nthe first tribal casinos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the 70s, not long after the ground-breaking Bryan case,\nthe Seminole Tribe of Florida set up a high-stakes bingo hall on their\nreservation land outside of Fort Lauderdale. The local sheriff threatened\narrests if the tribe opened the bingo hall. The Seminole Tribe sought\u2014and\nreceived\u2014legal protection from the courts. After several district court cases,\nthe Seminoles were allowed to continue their bingo operations based on the\nruling in the Bryan case. Soon the Seminoles opened additional bingo halls, and\neventually expanded into full-fledged casinos, and ultimately, the ownership of\none of the world\u2019s most recognized brands, the Hard Rock Caf\u00e9.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The tribal gaming controversy came to a head when police shut down gambling halls and arrested members of the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians near Indio, California. The tribe sued and won their case, and were allowed to continue their gaming operations. Ongoing clashes between local authorities and various tribes led to Congressional action. In 1988, Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act<\/a> (IGRA), signed by President Ronald Reagan. This furthered the power of tribes to open casino-like halls and expand their gaming activities, in a bid to reduce federal aid to reservations and encourage economic self-sufficiency. The law came with a price, though. The federal government would have ultimate authority over regulating the gaming activities of the tribe.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The IGRA allowed the tribes to keep their sovereignty, but\nallowed a sort of mixed sovereignty with the federal government when it\nspecifically involves gambling. The biggest reason for this was to allow for\nthe regulation of tribal gaming for economic development, and to protect against\nnegative influences like organized crime. In order for tribal casinos to expand\nfurther, various acts and laws have been passed to allow for an increase in\ngaming activities, from simple bingo halls to full-blown casinos. But the\nbattle for the growth of tribal gaming has been met with much opposition.\nIndividual states have argued against the negative effects of gambling on\ncommunities\u2014on and off reservations. Also, the increasing revenues of tribal casinos\nhas started to worry the big boys in Vegas, Atlantic City, and elsewhere. They\ndon\u2019t want the competition.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Owners of traditional casinos, most notably former-casino\nmogul Donald Trump, have loudly stated publicly that tribal casinos are overrun\nby organized crime. The FBI has refuted these claims, stating that they have\nseen no evidence of organized crime involvement in tribal gaming. Additional\nopposition comes in the form of state legal action against different types of\ncasino expansion. As the tribal casinos expanded, the revenue generated allowed\ntribes to purchase additional land in which to expand. Many states continue to fight\nover the rights of tribes to buy state land for gambling purposes. <\/p>\n\n\n\n As of 2011, there were 460 gambling operations run by 240\ntribes with a total annual revenue of $27 billion. And this number continues to\ngrow as new tribal casinos open on a regular basis. The amount of tribal land\nis not distributed evenly, so some states have larger amounts of reservation\nland upon which to build. Oklahoma has 113 tribal casinos, more than any other\nstate in the U.S. However, there are 562 federally recognized tribes in the\nUnited States, many of which have chosen not to run casinos.<\/p>\n\n\n\nBryan v. Itasca County<\/h2>\n\n\n
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nThe Seminole Tribe of Florida<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Tribal Casino Expansion<\/h2>\n\n\n
<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\nBlowback<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Effects of Indian Gaming on Native American Communities<\/h2>\n\n\n\n