Legal Opinion
Seneca-Cayuga Tribe v. National Indian Gaming Commission
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided April 17, 2003No. 01-5066PublishedCited by 60 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HENRY, Circuit Judge.
This case requires us to interpret the Johnson Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1171-1178, and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (“IGRA”), 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701-2719. Appellants are the federal agencies and officials who threatened to prosecute three Native American tribes for use of a device called the Magical Irish Instant Bingo Dispenser System, which we will call “the Machine.” Appellees are the three tribes, as well as the corporation that manufactured and supplied the Machine.
In response to the threat of prosecution, the appellees filed a complaint in federal district court.…
2Cases cited48 opinions
- Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Skidmore v. Swift & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by60 opinions
- Hill v. KempCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
- Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2009
- Corder v. Lewis Palmer School District No. 38Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2009
- Youren v. Tintic School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2003
- Wyoming v. United States Department of AgricultureCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2005
55 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.