AGO 1991-016.

Case DateMay 01, 1991
CourtConnecticut
Connecticut Attorney General Opinions 1991. AGO 1991-016. May 1, 1991Opinion No. 1991-016John B. Larson, President Pro TemporeCornelius O'Leary, Senate Majority LeaderLegislative Office BuildingCapitol AvenueHartford, CT 06106 Dear Senator Larson and Senator O'Leary: The issue in this request for opinion is whether the Connecticut General Assembly can, by repealing the authorization for charitable Las Vegas Nights in Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-186a et seq., eliminate the right of the Mashantucket Pequot Tribe (Tribe) to conduct a casino on its reservation in Ledyard. For the following reasons we believe that eliminating the exception for Las Vegas Nights and thereby leaving in place a criminal prohibition on all casino gaming in Connecticut would eliminate the legal basis for the District Court and Court of Appeals decisions that the Tribe was authorized under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) 25 U.S.C. §§ 2710-2721 (1988) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 1166-1168 (1988) to pursue casino gaming on its reservation. We must caution, however, that this is a case of first impression and the issue will ultimately have to be decided by the courts. By way of background, the Tribe is seeking to conduct a casino in Connecticut under procedures prescribed by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The contemplated games are Class III gaming activities which are allowed only in conformity with an agreed upon Tribal-State Compact or, in the absence of such an agreement, pursuant to procedures promulgated by the U.S. Secretary of the Interior. 25 U.S.C. § 2710. In 1989, the Tribe requested that the State enter into negotiations with the Tribe concerning the formation of a Compact shortly after IGRA became law. The State refused to negotiate over casino gaming because the State prohibited "such gaming", 25 U.S.C. §§ 2710(d)(1), allowing only certain limited games of chance to be conducted by charitable organizations pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 7-186a et seq. The Tribe brought suit in the federal courts to compel the State to negotiate, and the courts agreed to compel negotiations, based on their conclusion that the State allows casino gambling, albeit in a limited sense only:
The district court concluded that the games of chance that the Tribe seeks to conduct constitute "such gaming" as is permitted by Connecticut law at "Las Vegas nights" and that the Tribe's
...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT