FOLLOW US

Executives of two Minnesota tribal casinos are urging a federal district court to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a commercial casino and horse racetrack operator. The lawsuit, which accuses the tribal casinos of unlawfully dominating the state's gambling market, faces new legal arguments bolstered by a recent Ninth Circuit decision. The tribal casino executives argue that the ruling supports the dismissal of the case.

In a letter to U.S. District Judge Jerry W. Blackwell, attorneys for the Grand Casino Hinckley and Grand Casino Mille Lacs executives referenced a Dec. 13, 2024, Ninth Circuit ruling that upheld the dismissal of a similar challenge. The decision in the Maverick Gaming LLC case found that a tribe’s sovereign immunity prevented a commercial casino from joining the lawsuit. The attorneys argue that the same reasoning should apply to the current case, as it involves the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe and other Minnesota tribes that have a legally protected interest in maintaining their gaming compacts.

The lawsuit, filed in April, claims that the tribal casinos are violating the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) by offering Class III card games such as blackjack and poker, which are prohibited under Minnesota state law unless conducted at a licensed parimutuel racetrack. The commercial operator, Running Aces Casino, alleges that the tribal casinos, which generate hundreds of millions of dollars in gambling revenue, are offering unauthorized gaming activities, depriving Running Aces of substantial revenue.

Running Aces claims that the tribal casinos’ gambling activities, particularly their non-blackjack card games, violate federal and state laws. It also argues that the alleged violations give the tribal casinos an unfair competitive advantage and deprive the commercial casino of revenue from gambling, food, lodging, and entertainment.

The tribal casino executives assert that the case should be dismissed because the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe’s sovereign immunity prevents it from being joined as a defendant, similar to the Shoalwater Bay Tribe in the Ninth Circuit ruling. They argue that the Mille Lacs Band’s ability to operate Class III gaming is central to the dispute, and the relief sought by Running Aces could impair the tribe’s interests.

The executives also argue that the case should be dismissed based on equity and good conscience, as the potential relief could block the Mille Lacs Band from operating Class III gaming under its compact with Minnesota. They claim that the tribe, which relies on gaming revenue for its government and employment, should not be deprived of its rights through the lawsuit.

Oral arguments on the motion to dismiss are scheduled for January 28, with the case expected to have significant implications for tribal-state gaming compacts.

Running Aces is represented by Surya Saxena, Chad A. Blumenfield, Hamish P.M. Hume, David M. Lehn, William J. Harvey, and Jesse Panuccio, while the tribal executives are represented by Allison J. Mitchell, Casey L. Matthiesen, John W. Ursu, and Joshua Todd Peterson.

The case is North Metro Harness Initiative LLC d/b/a Running Aces v. Beattie et al., case number 0:24-cv-01369, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.