Spokane Indian Tribe v. United States

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that a 1988 amendment to IGRA “was designed to clarify that Indian tribes could not operate a statewide lottery without a tribal-state compact”
• holding that the plaintiff had a reasonable apprehension of litigation and loss of property based on the government’s letter “referenc[ing] . . . the violation of state and federal law” and the power to confiscate and destroy the gaming devices” by court order
• adopting the statutory interpreta- tion “which can ‘most fairly be said to be . . . harmonious with its scheme and with the general purposes that Congress manifested’ ”
• explaining proper method of interpreting an undefined term that appears in IGRA
• applying “real and reasonable apprehension” standard where federal government threatened tribe with immediate seizure of a specific type of lotto machine “without court orders” because the machines allegedly violated the Indian Gaming Rights Act
• \The player can participate in the game whether or not anyone else is playing at the same time.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).