Florida House of Representatives v. Crist
Florida Supreme Court
999 So. 2d 601 (2008)
- Written by Abby Roughton, JD
Facts
Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), Indian tribes could offer class III gaming (e.g., slot machines, pari-mutuel wagering, baccarat, and blackjack) on their tribal lands only if certain conditions were met. Specifically, the gaming had to be (1) authorized by tribal ordinance; (2) located in a state that permitted the relevant type of gaming for any purpose by any person, organization, or entity; and (3) conducted pursuant to a compact between the tribe and the state. The Seminole Indian Tribe of Florida (the tribe) had attempted for 16 years to negotiate a class III compact with the State of Florida (the state), a process that involved multiple lawsuits and intervention by the United States Department of the Interior. In November 2007, the tribe signed a compact with Florida Governor Charles Crist (defendant) that expanded the types of gambling that the tribe could offer on its tribal lands in Florida. The compact permitted the tribe to offer certain class III games that were illegal everywhere else in Florida in exchange for the tribe’s agreement to pay the state a share of the tribe’s gaming revenue. The Florida legislature had not authorized Crist to sign the compact and did not ratify the compact after it was signed. The Florida House of Representatives and then-House Speaker Marco Rubio (plaintiffs) filed a petition for a writ of quo warranto in the Florida Supreme Court, asserting that Crist did not have the authority to bind the state to the compact.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Cantero, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 798,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.