US Department of the Interior Responds to Seminole Tribe Sports Betting Case

The ongoing legal battle surrounding the Seminole tribe's gaming compact with Florida has taken another intriguing turn. The Department of the Interior's response to the request for a stay, a move widely anticipated in legal circles, has set the stage for a significant decision by the US Supreme Court.

This response could impact the Seminole tribe's plans to reintroduce statewide sports betting through their compact with Florida. A stay would effectively halt these operations until the legal matters are resolved, potentially overturning a previous decision by the DC Circuit.

Chief Justice John Roberts recently granted a temporary stay, leaving the question of whether it will become permanent hanging in the balance. At the heart of this case is whether the DOI had the authority to approve the Seminoles' gaming compact with Florida, particularly the provision allowing bets placed off Indian land to be routed through tribal servers, often referred to as the "hub-and-spoke" model.

West Flagler Associates, in their petition, argued that the compact violated several federal laws, including the constitution's equal protections clause. They have committed to filing a formal writ of certiorari by November 20th, the latest.

The federal government, represented by Solicitor-General Elizabeth Prelogar, contended that it was unlikely the Supreme Court would grant a writ of certiorari. To grant a stay, the court must be convinced that there is a "reasonable probability" that four out of the nine justices would grant the writ, with five voting in favor of West Flagler's petition.

Prelogar also asserted that the compact does not violate the text of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), the federal law that established the framework for Indian gaming. Furthermore, the government argued that the compact did not run afoul of the 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) and the equal protection clause.

In addition to the federal case, West Flagler is challenging the gaming compact in the Florida Supreme Court. Their argument centers on the belief that Governor Ron DeSantis and the legislature lacked the authority to authorize the compact due to the state's constitutional ban on an expansion of "casino gaming" without approval from voters in a referendum. Notably, the author of the constitutional amendment, the anti-gambling non-profit No Casinos, filed an amicus brief in support of West Flagler's argument.