Editorial: Supreme Court ruling could limit casinos

Friday, April 22, 2005  

"On the same day last month, two rulings were handed down - one from the U.S. Supreme Court and the other from the U.S. Interior Department - that could have a direct bearing on whether casino gambling is expanded in Connecticut. Both decisions should be hailed as welcome news.

In the first instance, the high court ruled that Indian tribes couldn't add to their tax-exempt holdings by buying property that is outside their reservations. The case involved the Oneida Indian Nation, which had refused to pay taxes on a gas station, convenience store and T-shirt factory in Sherrill, N.Y. The Indians claimed that because the properties were once part of their land, they had no obligation to pay taxes after they purchased the properties in 1997.

The justices disagreed, saying too much time had elapsed for the Oneidas to claim tribal sovereignty. What's more, if the acquisition were allowed, it would create a helter-skelter patchwork of local and tribal jurisdiction.

The decision has applicability in Connecticut, according to Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, because the Golden Hill Paugussetts and the Schaghticoke Tribal Nation each have pending land claims. The Schaghticokes, who won federal recognition in January 2004, hope to expand their 400-acre Kent reservation and build a casino, possibly in Bridgeport."

Get the Story:
Editorial: Setback For Casino Expansion (The Hartford Courant 4/22)
pwlat