Department of the Interior joins Florida sports betting case with new opposition filing
Federal agency argues that controversial tribal gaming compact is “consistent” with both IGRA and UIGEA ahead of expected US Supreme Court petition filing
The US Department of the Interior (DOI) has responded to a US Supreme Court decision to stay final judgment in the controversial legal row concerning Florida sports betting.
Last week, the Supreme Court granted a stay on the ruling allowing the Seminole Tribe’s Hard Rock Digital to relaunch in the Sunshine State after being given approval to do so by a prior DC Court of Appeals ruling in June.
The stay effectively kiboshed any potential relaunch, with West Flagler Associates, the lead plaintiff in the case, preparing a writ of certiorari petition for a review by the Supreme Court.
In a 30-page response to the proposed review of the prior court decision to approve a 30-year tribal gaming compact between the state of Florida and the Seminole Tribe, the US federal agency outlined its opposition to the granting of a writ of certiorari, should it be filed.
The DOI’s opposition centers on the assertion that the certiorari should not be granted by the court on any of the three issues raised by West Flagler Associates in its argument for a Supreme Court review.
West Flagler Associates has claimed that the tribal gaming compact, approved by the state of Florida and ratified by the DOI in May 2021, violates the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) and the Unlawful Internet Gaming Enforcement Act (UIGEA).
In both cases, the DOI has stated its belief that the compact does not violate IGRA or UIGEA and is “consistent” with both pieces of federal legislation.
“Each of those contentions lacks merit, and none presents a conflict with any decision of this Court or another Court of Appeals,” the DOI’s response stated.
“The Court therefore is not reasonably likely to grant certiorari, and there is no fair prospect that the Court would reverse the Court of Appeals’ judgment if it did grant review,” it added.
In addition to the main arguments, the DOI has said that in approving the tribal gaming compact, it did not violate so-called ‘equal protection principles’, which center on the belief that a government body may not deny people equal protection of its governing laws by acting discriminatorily.
The DOI contends that an agreement between sovereign entities, i.e. the Seminole Tribe and the state of Florida, includes no racial element and does not discriminate.
“A sovereign government has no race. And so long as an agreement between sovereigns does not contain provisions based on racial classifications of individuals, an equal-protection challenge to the agreement is properly analyzed under rational-basis review,” the DOI stated.
“The compact here does not specify advantages or disadvantages that a government provides or imposes on classes of individuals.
“But even if governmental preferences for individual members of the Tribe were at issue, it is a bedrock principle that [such] Indian status is a ‘political rather than racial’ classification,” the DOI added.
Lastly, the DOI asserts West Flagler Associates has failed to effectively demonstrate the irreparable harm caused by the implementation of the 30-year tribal gaming compact.
“If the Florida Supreme Court concludes that the Florida Legislature’s authorization of the placement of wagers outside Indian lands is not permissible under the Florida Constitution, that would afford applicants the relief they seek,” the DOI brief states.
“That pending case provides the appropriate forum to resolve applicants’ claims based on the meaning of state law. In these circumstances, equity counsels strongly against a stay from this Court,” it concludes.
Under US law, West Flagler Associates has a 90-day period to file a petition for a writ of certiorari in the case, a window which began on September 11. The Supreme Court has then to decide if the case merits a full review. As an example, the court only reviews between 100 and 150 of the 7,000 petitions that it receives every year.
A separate legal challenge filed by West Flagler Associates in the Florida Supreme Court seeking to overturn the 30-year tribal gaming compact on constitutional grounds is currently ongoing, with West Flagler recently being joined in support by Florida advocacy group, No Casinos.