California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987)

E613635

California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that affirmed tribal sovereignty by limiting state regulation of gaming activities on Native American reservations.

All labels observed (3)

How this entity was disambiguated

Statements (47)

Predicate Object
instanceOf Native American gaming case ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ
federal Indian law case ⓘ
landmark case ⓘ
affirms tribal sovereignty over gaming activities ⓘ
appliesTo California ⓘ
Indian reservations in Public Law 280 states ⓘ
aroseFrom Riverside County, California ⓘ
linked to: Riverside County

dispute over regulation of high-stakes bingo ⓘ
category United States Supreme Court cases on Native American tribal sovereignty ⓘ
United States Supreme Court cases on gambling law ⓘ
clarifies distinction between criminal/prohibitory and civil/regulatory state laws ⓘ
concerns bingo operations on Indian reservations ⓘ
card games on Indian reservations ⓘ
construes the scope of state power under Public Law 280 ⓘ
hasChiefJusticeAtTime William H. Rehnquist ⓘ
hasCitation 480 U.S. 202 ⓘ
hasCourt Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ
hasDecisionDate 1987-02-25 ⓘ
hasDocketNumber No. 85-1708 ⓘ
hasImpactOn development of Indian gaming law ⓘ
federal-tribal-state relations ⓘ
hasLegalIssue Public Law 280 ⓘ
criminal/prohibitory vs civil/regulatory distinction ⓘ
state regulation of tribal gaming ⓘ
tribal sovereignty ⓘ
hasMajorityAuthor Byron R. White ⓘ
hasMajorityOpinionBy Justice Byron White ⓘ
linked to: Byron R. White
hasPage 202 ⓘ
hasPetitioner State of California ⓘ
hasReporter United States Reports ⓘ
hasRespondent Cabazon Band of Mission Indians ⓘ
Morongo Band of Mission Indians ⓘ
hasVolume 480 ⓘ
hasVote 6-3 ⓘ
hasYear 1987 ⓘ
held that California could not apply its civil/regulatory gambling laws to tribal gaming operations ⓘ
that states with Public Law 280 jurisdiction may enforce only criminal/prohibitory laws on reservations, not civil/regulatory laws ⓘ
that tribal gaming is protected from most state regulation when the state permits similar gaming for any purpose ⓘ
influenced Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 ⓘ
interprets Public Law 280 ⓘ
involves California state gambling laws ⓘ
Native American gaming ⓘ
isConsidered a key precedent in Native American sovereignty jurisprudence ⓘ
jurisdictionBasis federal question jurisdiction ⓘ
limits state regulatory authority on Indian reservations ⓘ
preceded Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 ⓘ

How these facts were elicited

Referenced by (4)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

Native American sovereignty → historicallyArticulatedIn → California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987) ⓘ
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act → relatedTo → Cabazon Band of Mission Indians v. California ⓘ
subject linked to: IGRA
linked to: California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987)
United States federal Indian law and policy → shapedBy → California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians ⓘ
linked to: California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987)
Public Law 100-497 → motivatedBy → California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians (1987) ⓘ