On September 25, the US Department of the Interior withdrew a crucial legal interpretation that had allowed Alaska tribes to operate casino-style gaming halls, casting doubt on the future of two recently established projects. This decision has sparked considerable concern among tribal leaders and state officials, as it challenges the legal foundation upon which these gaming operations were built.
Deputy Interior Secretary Kate MacGregor announced the reversal in a memo, arguing that the prior opinion from the Biden administration did not represent the most accurate interpretation of the law. The order mandates that the National Indian Gaming Commission and other Interior officials reassess approvals that were based on the now-reversed interpretation, as reported by the Alaska Beacon.
This legal shift has rekindled a long-standing debate: Should Alaska tribes enjoy the same gaming rights as those in the contiguous United States? The 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act significantly altered the landscape for Alaska Natives by replacing most reservations with Native corporations and removing nearly all federal trust lands from tribal control. Although individual land allotments were still possible, the state has contended that these do not constitute tribal jurisdiction.
However, a 2022 decision by the Interior Department challenged this stance, concluding that Alaska tribes could, under certain conditions, exert authority over these allotment parcels. Acting on this interpretation, the Native Village of Eklutna inaugurated the Chin’an Gaming Hall near Anchorage earlier this year, while the Central Council of the Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes embarked on building a gaming facility close to Juneau.
Now, the future of these initiatives hangs in the balance. Tribal leaders are carefully considering their next steps, but they remain resolute in their stand for sovereignty. Eklutna President Aaron Leggett reassured that Birchwood Hall remains operational and is a source of employment and income. Meanwhile, Tlingit and Haida President Richard Peterson acknowledged that the Interior’s ruling was not unexpected and reiterated the council’s dedication to fostering economic prospects for their members.
State officials, on the other hand, have expressed approval of the Interior’s decision. Alaska Attorney General-designee Stephen Cox praised the move as a restoration of the “jurisdictional balance” outlined by Congress and supported by previous court decisions, emphasizing Alaska’s unique status under federal Indian law.
This development may also have significant implications for ongoing litigation. A federal appeals court is reviewing a challenge from nearby landowners against the Eklutna gaming facility. Additionally, a separate lawsuit initiated by the state is on hold, contingent upon the outcome of the current case. Experts anticipate that the Tlingit and Haida project will encounter similar legal obstacles if construction progresses.
Bob Anderson, the former Interior solicitor who authored the Biden-era opinion, has openly criticized the reversal. He pointed out that tribes in the contiguous United States have long functioned under the same federal statutes, implying that the legal basis for Alaska tribes should be consistent. Anderson believes that Alaska tribes will continue to succeed in court, maintaining that their right to establish gaming operations on allotment lands is solid.
Despite the uncertainty, Birchwood Hall remains open for business. However, the broader issue of whether Alaska tribes can sustain gaming activities on allotment lands remains unresolved. This leaves the fate of both projects subject to the whims of evolving federal interpretations and court rulings.
In the backdrop of this legal tussle, it’s evident that the economic stakes are high. The gaming industry has long been a vehicle for economic empowerment across tribal nations in the United States, providing jobs, revenue, and community investments. For Alaska tribes, leveraging gaming operations represents a crucial step towards economic self-sufficiency and cultural preservation.
On the other side, state officials argue that maintaining the distinct legal framework for Alaska is necessary to uphold the integrity of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and ensure that tribal corporations and federal laws coexist without conflict.
The debate hinges on a complex interplay of legal interpretations, state interests, and tribal rights. While the Interior Department’s latest decision sends ripples through Alaska’s tribal communities, it also sets the stage for a potential shift in how federal Indian law is applied in the state. As legal battles loom, the outcome could redefine the landscape for tribal gaming in Alaska, with wide-ranging implications for economic development and tribal sovereignty.
In this atmosphere of uncertainty, the resilience and determination of Alaska’s tribal leaders will be crucial. Their commitment to asserting sovereignty and pursuing economic opportunities reflects a broader narrative of indigenous empowerment and self-determination. As they navigate the legal and political challenges ahead, the eyes of the nation will be on Alaska, watching closely how these events unfold and what they portend for tribal gaming across the country.
Garry Sputnim is a seasoned journalist and storyteller with over a decade of experience in the trenches of global news. With a keen eye for uncovering stories that resonate, Alex has reported from over 30 countries, bringing light to untold narratives and the human faces behind the headlines. Specializing in investigative journalism, Garry has a knack for technology and social justice issues, weaving compelling narratives that bridge tech and humanity. Outside the newsroom, Garry is an avid rock climber and podcast host, exploring stories of resilience and innovation.
