The shuttered Bay Mills Indian Community casino in Vanderbilt, Michigan. Photo © Bay Mills News
Matthew Fletcher offers thoughts on oral arguments in Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community, an Indian gaming case that was heard by the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday:
As has become the norm in Indian law arguments, Justice Sotomayor opened with an initial flurry of questions to State’s counsel, a discussion that went on for some time (page 3 line 25 through page 6 line 20). She wondered why the State was the petitioner here when the district court expressly did not include the State in the denial for an injunction against the Vanderbilt casino (it was a motion by the Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians instead), a point made by the National Congress of American Indians. The State’s response was fairly weak — the parties (and it turns out, perhaps, the CA6) merely “assum[ed]” the State and LTBB’s claims were consolidated. Moreover, Justice Sotomayor’s questions delayed the State’s wish to proceed directly to a discussion of tribal immunity by several minutes. Justice Ginsburg further delayed the State (page 5 line 5 through page 8 line 18) by wanting to know why the State did not choose to invoke the dispute resolution mechanism in the 1993 gaming compact with Bay Mills, especially as Justice Kagan later noted the Court had previously held in C&L Enterprises that an arbitration provision can effectuate a waiver of tribal immunity. From page 8 line 19 to page 9 line 7, the Chief Justice wanted to know why the State raised its own immunity when BMIC sued for a declaratory judgment on the merits of the Vanderbilt casino theory. The State’s blithe(?) response was “all roads lead to tribal immunity.” Justice Sotomayor finally got the argument into important ground by asking about Ex parte Young, which prompted the State to explain why federalism principles justified the procedural posture of this case.Get the Story:
Fletcher Commentary on the Michigan v. Bay Mills Argument (Turtle Talk 12/2) Relevant Documents:
Supreme Court Order List | Supreme Court Docket Sheet No. 12-515 6th Circuit Decision:
Michigan v. Bay Mills Indian Community (August 15, 2012) Related Stories:
Supreme Court takes up Bay Mills off-reservation gaming case (12/2)
Join the Conversation