Judge rules against tribe in donations case

Erica Werner

Friday, Feb. 28, 2003 | 10:38 a.m.

LOS ANGELES -- In a case seen as an important test of Indian sovereignty, a judge ruled Thursday that a Southern California tribe is subject to the same state campaign-finance laws that apply to other political contributors.

The ruling dealt a blow to claims of sovereign immunity by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, one of the state's wealthiest and most influential tribes.

"The court rejects the assertion that the doctrine of tribal immunity applies here to insulate the tribe from the jurisdiction of California state courts to enforce state laws designed to protect the integrity of state legislative and electoral process," Sacramento Superior Court Judge Loren McMaster wrote in refusing to dismiss a lawsuit brought against the tribe by the state Fair Political Practices Commission.

"If large contributors to the electoral and initiative process -- like the tribe -- were not subject to FPPC enforcement actions, the institutions and processes of California's government would be subverted to a significant extent," the judge's 17-page ruling said.

"It's a slam dunk," commission Chairwoman Karen Getman said. "The court agreed with us that tribal sovereign immunity really was not the issue here, it was California's state sovereignty that was at stake."

Tribal attorney Art Bunce said the ruling was wrong and the tribe would likely appeal.

"Other states have attempted to sue tribes on equally compelling grounds and have failed. I don't understand why the result is different in this case," he said.

The Fair Political Practices Commission alleged that the Agua Caliente band, which operates two casinos in and near Palm Springs, was late in disclosing more than $8 million in donations to candidates and causes between 1998 and 2002.

Agua Caliente argued that because of its tribal sovereignty it was not bound by the state's campaign rules and the state did not have the right to sue it to enforce them.

The tribe could face multimillion dollar fines.

McMaster wrote that his ruling was not intended to affect tribal immunity.

"Instead, this court determines that the federal common law does not extend immunity to Indian tribes from suits alleging that they have violated state laws designed to protect the integrity of the state's own political processes," the ruling said.

"This is the clash of the sovereigns," said Joseph Wiseman, who teaches Indian law at Empire State Law School in Sonoma. "It's potentially a groundbreaking case because it does effectively change the dynamics of sovereign immunity."

"If this case is upheld on appeal it will raise the power of any individual state to enforce its laws on any entity including another sovereign," he said.

In recent years Indian tribes have become some of the top political contributors in the state and Agua Caliente, the only tribe in the state with two casinos, has been among the most generous donors.

The Agua Caliente donated more than $5 million to support Proposition 5 to legalize Indian gambling in California in 1998. They were also the third-largest donor to legislative races in the state that year.

The tribe posts campaign finance reports on its website and contends it discloses its political activity, just not according to the Fair Political Practices Commission's rules. Bunce said the tribe is willing to make a government-to-government agreement with the commission similar to the compacts that govern Indian gambling. Getman said the tribe has not formally made such an offer.