Constitutionality of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: State Sovereignty and Compulsory Negotiations - Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, The

Authors

Joel P. Brous

Abstract

Indian tribes located within states that permit gambling are allowed to license and operate gaming activities on Indian lands2 as long as these activities comply with the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act [hereinafter IGRA]. 3 Congress enacted the IGRA to balance tribal autonomy and economic self-sufficiency with the state police power seeking to control tribal gaming operations.4 In Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit addressed the constitutionality of the IGRA and held that the IGRA violated neither the Eleventh nor the Tenth Amendments.' This Note examines the split of authority in the federal courts regarding the constitutionality of the IGRA and postulates a Supreme Court determination on the issue.

Recommended Citation

Joel P. Brous, Constitutionality of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act: State Sovereignty and Compulsory Negotiations - Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe v. South Dakota, The, 1994 J. Disp. Resol. (1994)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/jdr/vol1994/iss1/12