District court decision could undermine tribal gambling

Don Thompson

Tuesday, Nov. 20, 2001 | 9:59 a.m.

SACRAMENTO -- The future of California's tribal gaming law is in the hands of a federal judge, who must decide if the state gives American Indians an unfair monopoly on Nevada-style gambling.

Card room operators who can't offer the same sorts of slot machines and table games formed an unlikely alliance with gambling opponents Friday. Both told U.S. District Judge David Levi that federal law bars California from letting tribes offer casino-style games that are banned elsewhere in the state.

"The state cannot permit gaming only on Indian lands," contended James Hamilton, a Washington, D.C.-based constitutional attorney representing opponents. "The Congress did not intend to give Indian tribes monopoly rights."

Such a ruling would bar Las Vegas-style casinos anywhere in California -- or force the state to let non-Indians offer similar games.

Opponents' original target was the Lytton Band of Pomo Indians' plan to open California's first urban casino by converting an existing card room in San Pablo, near San Francisco. A separate suit also before Levi contends the tribe would unconstitutionally benefit from special legislation inserted into federal law last year by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif.

Both suits allege violations of constitutional equal protection clauses, and have grown into a challenge to Proposition 1A, the measure voters approved in March 2000 that permits tribal casinos in California.

Deputy Attorney General Marc Le Forestier argued that California's tribal casinos don't violate federal law or the Constitution, even as his office is advising Gov. Gray Davis on legal measures to block the San Pablo casino.

Davis opposes the urban casino as an improper expansion of gambling, the same argument used by other critics.

"Put it out in the middle of nowhere, where most of them are. It's nothing against the Indians -- it's all of the big interests behind it," Lidia Robinson said after Friday's 2 1/2-hour court hearing. Robinson, who lives near San Pablo, organized local opposition and filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case.

The San Pablo casino is backed by Philadelphia sports entrepreneur Sam Katz and more than 20 outside investors. The Lytton band plans to use its gambling money to buy land and make improvements in a rural location far from its urban casino.

Tribal leaders and attorneys argue the opposition to their plan comes mainly from card rooms that fear they can't compete against a Las Vegas-style casino.

Until voters approved tribal casinos, horse tracks and card rooms offering limited card- and bingo-type games competed with the state lottery and nearby Nevada casinos for gamblers' money. Card room operators now say they are fighting for their survival with the court challenges.

Levi must first rule whether he has jurisdiction over the lawsuits, but attorneys on both sides said they expect him to accept the landmark cases and rule on the merits in several weeks.

"He knows everyone needs resolution of these issues," said Robert D. "Bo" Links, attorney for Artichoke Joe's card club, one of the opponents.

But Levi won't have the last word, both sides said.

"This is just the first step," said Le Forestier. "It will be appealed by whoever is not the prevailing party."