The Aquinnah Wampanoag Tribe of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts, is returning to federal court this month to defend its rights to build a casino in the town of Aquinnah without being reviewed by an island commission.
A hearing has been scheduled for May 20 in Boston.
The tribe already successfully defended its right to build a Class II casino, a right that was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court. However, the town of Aquinnah claims that a local commission still has to right to hold the tribe to local building codes and architectural review.
The tribe argues that since the first chance it got the town cut off electricity to the site its motives are to stop the project.
The Aquinnah have partnered with Global Gaming Solutions, the gaming arm of the Chickasaw Nation, to open a 10,000 square foot, bingo style casino.
The Vineyard Gazette quoted from the court filing: “The tribe has been deprived of electricity to continue construction, which is integral to the tribe being able to offer gaming on its Indian lands.”
The tribe acquired its lands through a settlement act approved by Congress in 1987. That act bound the tribe not to offer gaming and to abide by state and local laws. The next year Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) which the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals cited in granting the tribe’s right to build a casino. The town argues that while the tribe’s right to build the casino is no longer in question, that it must otherwise abide by state and local laws.
In the tribe’s filings it argues, “Despite having lost at the First Circuit, the town, based upon its unfounded fear of an Indian tribe engaging in commercial activities to improve its economic condition and the conditions of its tribal members, now asks this court to put the town in a position of being able to interfere with or prevent the tribe from exercising its sovereign right to govern gaming activities on the land.”
The town alleges, “Since the tribe never raised the permitting issue on appeal, in its decision, the First Circuit addressed only whether the IGRA applies to the settlement lands and whether it displaced local and state authority over gaming on those lands.”
