State of Texas v. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

955 F.3d 408 (2020)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

State of Texas v. Ysleta del Sur Pueblo

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
955 F.3d 408 (2020)

Facts

In 1968, Congress recognized the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo (the tribe) (defendant) as an Indian tribe and transferred trust responsibilities (e.g., the responsibility for protecting tribal lands and resources and ensuring tribes’ self-government and economic success) from the federal government to the State of Texas (plaintiff). In 1983, Texas ended its trust relationship with the tribe, and the tribe sought to reestablish a federal trust relationship. In 1987, Congress passed the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and Alabama and Coushatta Indian Tribes of Texas Restoration Act (restoration statute), which restored the tribe’s federal trust status in exchange for the tribe’s agreement that the tribe’s gaming activities would comply with Texas law. The restoration statute provided that all gaming activities prohibited by Texas law would be prohibited on tribal lands and punishable by the same civil and criminal penalties provided by Texas law. In 1993, in Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas (Ysleta I), the tribe sued Texas in federal court under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA)—a federal statute purporting to set uniform regulatory standards for gaming on Indian tribal lands. The tribe asserted that Texas had refused to negotiate a compact permitting class III gaming (e.g., casino-style gaming) under IGRA. The Fifth Circuit held in Ysleta I that the restoration statute, not IGRA, governed the determination of whether the tribe’s desired gaming activities were permissible on tribal lands. Texas subsequently obtained a permanent injunction forbidding the tribe from engaging in gaming activities on their reservation, but the tribe was twice found in contempt of the injunction. In 2016, the tribe announced that it would begin offering bingo. An inspection of an entertainment center on tribal land found live-called bingo and thousands of slot-type machines available to the public around the clock. Texas sued the tribe in federal court to enjoin the gaming activities, arguing that the tribe’s gaming activities violated Texas law and regulations. The district court granted a permanent injunction, and the tribe appealed. On appeal, the tribe asserted that IGRA, and not the restoration statute, governed the tribe’s ability to conduct gaming on tribal lands.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Willett, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership