{"id":21375,"date":"2022-02-23T17:10:29","date_gmt":"2022-02-23T22:10:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.indianz.com\/News\/?p=21375"},"modified":"2022-02-23T17:10:30","modified_gmt":"2022-02-23T22:10:30","slug":"scotusblog-supreme-court-tackles-bingo-and-tribal-sovereignty","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/indianz.com\/News\/2022\/02\/23\/scotusblog-supreme-court-tackles-bingo-and-tribal-sovereignty\/","title":{"rendered":"SCOTUSBlog: Supreme Court tackles bingo and tribal sovereignty"},"content":{"rendered":" \"Ysleta<\/a>
Attorney Brant C. Martin for petitioners, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo. Courtroom sketch by Art Lien<\/figcaption>\r\n \r\n
Just say \u201cBingo!\u201d Or \u201cDingo!\u201d<\/div>\r\n
A view from the Courtroom<\/div>\r\n
Wednesday, February 23, 2022<\/div>\r\n
SCOTUSblog<\/div>\r\n
scotusblog.com<\/a><\/div>\r\n

<\/p>\r\nA View from the Courtroom<\/em><\/a> is an inside look at oral arguments and opinion announcements unfolding in real time.<\/em> 

<\/P>\r\nAs some Supreme Court podcasters have noted, Justice Stephen Breyer\u2019s retirement announcement in late January pushed the so-called Maskgate<\/a> controversy out of the spotlight.

<\/P>\r\nToday, the justices return to the bench after their long mid-winter recess, and the question in the press room is whether Justice Sonia Sotomayor will return to the bench and other justices will be masked. The omicron variant of COVID-19<\/a> had prompted Sotomayor to participate in January\u2019s arguments via an audio feed from her chambers, while all but one of the other justices wore masks on the bench, either some or all of the time. Justice Neil Gorsuch was the much-discussed holdout.

<\/P>\r\nAs we wait for the session to begin, the always astute Art Lien<\/a> notices an object in the courtroom that is not usually there, at least not in so prominent a position. A fire extinguisher is resting on the floor just below and to the left of the bench. Perhaps the court has concluded that certain podcasters are in need of more fodder for their metaphors about the status of the court.

<\/P>\r\n\"SCOTUS<\/a>

A fire extinguisher in front of bench. Courtroom sketch by Art Lien<\/figcaption>\r\n

<\/P>\r\nLien has, of course, quickly drawn a sketch of the fire extinguisher. He is entering his last few months of arguments before himself retiring at the end of the term. He first started sketching Supreme Court arguments in the 1977-78 term, when Regents of the University of California v.  Bakke<\/a><\/em>, an affirmative-action case, was decided. I would like to prevail on him to go one more term and have some symmetry by sketching the Harvard<\/a> and University of North Carolina<\/a> affirmative-action cases, but it seems that his mind is made up. And unlike Breyer, Lien has not conditioned his retirement date on the confirmation of a successor.

<\/P>\r\nAt 10 a.m., the justices \u2014 all nine of them \u2014 appear from behind the curtains. Sotomayor is back but with what appears to be double masks \u2014 a black N95 or equivalent mask on top of a light-colored surgical mask. But every other justice is without a mask today. The court has essentially ruled the omicron wave to be abated.

<\/P>\r\nSotomayor and Gorsuch, neighbors on the bench, seem to be in good spirits as they sometimes trade in conversation during today\u2019s two arguments, both of which involve different aspects of Native American sovereignty.

<\/P>\r\nThe first case, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo v. Texas<\/a><\/em>, provides some amusing moments and seems a good one for the justices to break out of any lethargy from their long recess. The question is whether a 1987 federal statute subjects certain Indian tribes in Texas to that state\u2019s entire body of gambling law. And the key practical effect is whether the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama-Coushatta tribes may operate bingo games on their reservations.

<\/P>\r\nAlthough the court has ruled before on Indian tribes and bingo, notably in a 1987 case from California that is central to the Texas case, my immediate thought goes to the late Justice Antonin Scalia, who in a 1988 argument told the lawyer before him to \u201cJust say \u2018Bingo!\u2019 or something\u201d<\/a> when he located a particular phrase in a lower-court opinion. (It was one of Scalia\u2019s top quips in a SCOTUSblog compilation<\/a> after the justice died six years ago this month.)

<\/P>\r\n\r\n