The Seminole Tribe of Florida's fight to keep exclusive statewide rights to offer blackjack and baccarat will continue in federal court in Tallahassee, starting Monday.
The case is the Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida, case number 4:15-cv-00516, to be argued in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.
The abrupt removal of James Billie as chairman of the Seminole Tribe of Florida on Wednesday is unlikely to have a profound affect on future negotiations with the state because the Tribe is "in solidarity," sources close to the Tribe's leadership told Sunshine State News on Saturday.
Also last Wednesday, the Tribe rebutted the state of Florida's argument that sovereign immunity bars its claim that the state violated obligations to negotiate a renewal of its right to operate the banked card games, saying the state waived that protection by filing its own suit in federal court. The state and Tribe lawsuits have been combined.
It is that dual lawsuit that will begin Monday. Proceedings are expected to last through Friday.
The Tribe has argued that under a clause in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, the state was required to negotiate a new deal in good faith after the expiration of the first gambling compact.
To repeat the terms of the 2010 gambling compact with the state, the Tribe was allowed to conduct banked card games at its casinos for the first five years of the 20-year agreement.
When the five years expired, however, the Tribe continued to keep the games going, arguing it is allowed because the state breached the compact by allowing others to offer the games.
The state filed its own suit -- which since has been consolidated with the Tribe's -- in federal court. The Seminoles want enforcement of its ban on the card games.
According to Nathan Hale, writing for Law360.com: "In doing so, the state voluntarily invoked federal court jurisdiction, which the Tribe says the U.S. Supreme Court has found amounts to a waiver of sovereign immunity, citing the high court's decision in 2002's Lapides v. Board of Regents of University System of Georgia."
The Tribe argued in its memorandum, “In Lapides, the Supreme Court held that a state cannot avail itself of a federal court and at the same time assert its Eleventh Amendment immunity to deny the federal court the ability to fully hear the case.”
The Seminoles claim the IGRA is the state's sole authority to ban gambling on Indian lands, but that the power is conditioned on a duty to negotiate a compact in good faith.
“[T]he power of a state to seek federal court help is conditioned on the concomitant power of the Tribe to invoke the jurisdiction of the federal court to enforce its right to good faith bargaining,” the Tribe argues.
“It is patently clear from the language and structure of IGRA that Congress did not intend to empower one party to invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court to enforce a conditional right, but to deny the other party the right to invoke federal court jurisdiction to enforce the condition.”
The Seminole Tribe of Florida is represented by Barry Richard and Michael Howard Moody of Greenberg Traurig LLP, and Joseph H. Webster of Hobbs Straus Dean & Walker LLP.
The state of Florida is represented by Jason Maine of Florida’s Department of Business and Professional Regulation, William N. Spicola of the Executive Office of the Governor, J. Carter Anderson and Anne-Leigh Gaylord Moe of Bush Ross PA, and Robert W. Stocker II, Dennis J. Whittlesey and Patrick M. Sullivan of Dickinson Wright PLLC.
Reach Nancy Smith at nsmith@sunshinestatenews.com or at 228-282-2423. Twitter: @NancyLBSmith
