Supreme Court Report

Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →

Stand Up for California!, et al. v. Department of the Interior, et al.

Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 16-5327, 16-5328 · judgment January 12, 2018

Certiorari denied · January 7, 2019
Pre-decision estimate: 3% cert probability

Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.

Questions presented

This case presents the following exceptionally important questions of federal law:

  1. Subject to certain exceptions, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA,” 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq.) expressly prohibits casino gaming on land acquired by the Secretary of the Interior into trust for Indian tribes after 1988 (so-called “off-reservation” land). 25 U.S.C. § 2719(a). Under the exception applicable here, a tribe may conduct gaming on off-reservation land if, among other requirements, the Secretary determines that gaming “would be in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members,” and “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community. . . .” 25 U.S.C. § 2719(b)(1)(A). This case presents the question whether the Secretary may conclude that a casino “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community” despite uncontroverted evidence the casino will have unmitigated detrimental impacts to the community.

  2. The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (“IRA,” 25 U.S.C. §§ 5101 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary to take land into trust “for the purpose of providing land for Indians.” 25 U.S.C. § 5108. As relevant here, the IRA defines “Indian” to include “all persons of Indian descent who are members of any recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction.” Ibid. This case presents the question whether multiple Indians residing on the same reservation are, per se, an “Indian tribe” irrespective of the individual Indians’ tribal affiliations, if any.

Counsel of record

For petitioner
Sean M. Sherlock
Snell & Wilmer

For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day

Case

Conference history
Distributed for 2 conferences

Proceedings

  1. Jan 07 2019
    Petition DENIED. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
  2. Jan 02 2019
    Letter of December 31, 2018, from counsel for respondent North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians received.
  3. Dec 12 2018
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/4/2019.
  4. Dec 10 2018
    Reply of petitioners Stand Up for California!, et al. filed.
  5. Nov 26 2018
    Brief of respondent North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians in opposition filed.
  6. Nov 26 2018
    Brief of Federal Respondents in opposition filed.
  7. Oct 24 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including November 26, 2018, for all respondents.
  8. Oct 23 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from October 29, 2018 to November 26, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
  9. Sep 21 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 29, 2018, for all respondents.
  10. Sep 20 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including October 29, 2018.
  11. Sep 20 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 28, 2018 to October 29, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
  12. Sep 19 2018
    Motion to extend the time to file a response from September 28, 2018 to October 29, 2018, submitted to The Clerk.
  13. Aug 29 2018
    Response Requested. (Due September 28, 2018)
  14. Jul 25 2018
    DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/24/2018.
  15. Jul 24 2018
    Waiver of right of respondent North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians to respond filed.
  16. Jul 23 2018
    Waiver of right of respondent Department of the Interior, et al. to respond filed.
  17. Jul 09 2018
    Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 10, 2018)