Lonesome Gambler said:
Trust me, I don't plan on ending up there, but do you have any links to examples? I'm interested to hear the details.
This story doesn't involve a gambler, however it does involve a disabled man who was at a bar on the Seminole Reservation in Hollywood, FL. Anybody not familiar with the Hard Rock Hollywood, FL casino, it features a wide variety of clubs, bars, restaurants, and shops right by the casino. They are all located on the property, so they are exempt from Broward County's laws that regulate liquor sale times, smoking restrictions, etc. Also, this area is patrolled by Seminole Tribe police, who of course are biased towards the best interest of the Seminole Indians.
(Dead link: http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2009/08/disabled_miami_man_says_he_was).
Here is another story. Although not directly related, it gives an example of how the Seminole Indians can work things into their favor.
(From
http://weblogs.sun-sentinel.com/news/columnists/mayo/blog/2009/10/ )
October 15, 2009
Federal judge: Beware of contracts with Seminoles
> Posted by Michael Mayo on October 15, 2009 11:04 AM
As the state’s gambling compact with the Seminoles continues to sputter and stall, another contract dispute should serve as a reminder about the perils of doing business with the sovereign tribe.
It involves the Seminoles’ abrupt July 2008 lease termination and takeover of the Hollywood Mobile Estates trailer park on State Road 7.
The land belongs to the Seminoles, but for years they leased it to a partnership controlled by Hartman & Tyner, the Michigan firm that also owns the Mardi Gras Casino.
(I know, I was shocked that the gambling rivals were business partners, but Mardi Gras head Dan Adkins said the arrangement pre-dated the Seminoles’ gambling empire.)
The Seminoles claim that the lease was breached and they seized the mobile home park by force last year.
The U.S. Department of Interior, which oversees tribal matters through its Bureau of Indian Affairs, found the lease was improperly voided but hasn’t done anything about it.
In turn, the management company sued the Interior Department.
This week, a federal judge in Fort Lauderdale denied a motion for a rehearing and upheld the case’s dismissal. U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas ruled that his hands were tied in ordering the Department of Interior to take any action against the tribe.
Dimitrouleas’ order included some strong wording that should be a warning to anyone doing business (or considering doing business) with the Seminoles.
He wrote:
“It now appears that the Department may be unwilling to do anything to damage the fiduciary or government-to-government relationship it enjoys with this or any Indian tribe…
If tribes have sovereign immunity, except for limited circumstances where only the Department of Interior can intervene, and if the Department will only intervene to protect the rights of the Tribe, then non-Indian entities should be very wary of entering into contracts that will be enforced only against them.”
Let me repeat that, with emphasis: “Non-Indian entities should be very wary of entering into contracts that will be enforced only against them.”
That shouldn’t exactly fill Floridians with confidence about the Seminoles’ future adherence to a gambling compact that’s filled with escape clauses and wiggle room.
The proposed compact contains provisions for disputes, including arbitration and court remedies, but this is the point where it’s time to wonder if the Interior Department will make the Seminoles comply.
Under the current system of sovereignty and shackled courts, anything that takes place on tribal land seems stacked in the Seminoles’ favor.
As Dimitrouleas noted: “Certainly, there was a time in American history where Indian tribes were deserving of the paternal protection of the U.S. government. Whether that situation continues to exist is a matter for political debate in another forum.”
Interesting stuff. Anybody concerned?