January 2006

Judge wants NIGC to weigh in on disputed UKB Casino

TAHLEQUAH OK
Sam Lewin 2/1/2006

A federal judge has asked the National Indian Gaming Commission to examine the case of a controversial gambling facility run by an Oklahoma tribe. The United Keetoowah Band has been battling with state officials and the Cherokee Nation over the Keetoowah Casino in Tahlequah, a gaming operation with several hundred slot machines and a bingo hall.

The Oklahoma State Attorney General’s office had hoped that federal officials would issue a decision against the UKB so they could shut the casino down as well as possibly file a criminal complaint against the tribe. The situation has been in state hands ever since the NIGC ruled in 2000 that the operation was illegal. The NIGC referred the case to state jurisdiction. Oklahoma officials say they want the operation closed because it is not on Indian trust land. The UKB counters that the casino is situated in a “dependent Indian community.”

U.S. District Judge Ronald White has now given the case back to the NIGC. White says he wants the agency to “investigate, compile a complete record and consider all relevant factors” and then “explain that determination fully, including all relevant facts and application of applicable law.”
The reason White is seeking an explanation from the NIGC is because in 1993 the agency began to regulate the casino-treating it as a legal gaming operation-only to declare it illegal seven years later.

UKB officials declared White’s decision a victory. “We are extremely pleased with the outcome of the ruling and commend Judge White on his ruling. The judge has been fair and has really looked at the issues from all sides,” said UKB chief George Wickliffe. “This means we will continue to offer services to our members, assistance and education allowances, and provide support for the tribal programs.” Although not a party to the case, the Cherokee Nation filed what is known as a “friend-of-the-court” brief in support of the state’s position. White criticized the brief.

“While the court generally welcomes helpful analyses from ‘friends of the court,’ any analysis that completely disregards pertinent facts is not helpful. Indeed, the Cherokee Nation's first brief came dangerously close to affirmatively misrepresenting the law,” White wrote. The Cherokees have previously said that their interest in the case is motivated by fairness. To paraphrase the Cherokee argument: If the UKB can run gaming on non-trust land, why can’t other tribes?

The UKB and Cherokees have had their share of disputes. In 2001, the UKB accused the Cherokee Nation of encouraging federal regulators to crack down on their gaming operation. The Cherokees denied being involved. The UKB says the casino is a financial necessity for the band’s 7,000 members. “We are a major employer in this area and the economic impact of both our gaming operation and the tribe is significant. The casino stays open and we all are winners,” said UKB assistant chief Charles Locust.