Updated 1 day ago
Last progress July 31, 2025 (6 months ago)
Applies the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) to gaming on the Indian lands of the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas and removes conflicting provisions in their Restoration Act so those Tribes are regulated under the same federal gaming rules as most other federally recognized Tribes. The change updates federal statutory language to eliminate special or redundant regulatory text that followed a 2022 Supreme Court decision affecting those Texas Tribes.
The 1987 Supreme Court decision in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians held that if California regulated (rather than prohibited) gaming, then an Indian Tribe could offer similar gaming on its land.
In response to the Cabazon decision, Congress enacted the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (Public Law 100–497), which has supported Tribal economic development and self-sufficiency and provides a regulatory structure for gaming on Tribal lands.
Over 200 Indian Tribes in 28 States are currently regulated under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
On June 15, 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas Restoration Act (101 Stat. 666) allows the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe to offer, on Tribal lands, gaming activities that are not fully prohibited by Texas law and without regard to Texas regulations over such gaming activities. The text also links this matter to Public Law 100–89.
As a result of that Supreme Court decision, the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama-Coushatta Tribe are the only two Indian Tribes in the United States identified in the section as having overlapping regulatory language governing their gaming activities (the text references "Public Law 497" and 101 Stat. 666 and again cites Public Law 100–89).
Last progress June 4, 2025 (8 months ago)
Introduced on June 4, 2025 by Morgan Luttrell
Primary effects: Tribal governments — Ysleta del Sur Pueblo and the Alabama and Coushatta Tribes of Texas — will be regulated under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act like most other federally recognized tribes. That subjects gaming on their Indian lands to IGRA's regulatory structure, reporting, background checks, NIGC oversight, and the IGRA processes for Class II and Class III gaming (including state-compact mechanisms for Class III). Tribal gaming operators may need to adjust compliance, licensing, revenue-sharing or compact-negotiation approaches to align with IGRA requirements. Federal agencies: the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) and Department of the Interior will enforce and administer parts of IGRA coverage for those lands. State and local actors: the State of Texas and local governments may see changes in their roles around Class III compact negotiations and oversight relationships; any impacts on state revenues or local economic conditions depend on the tribes' gaming activities and whether Class III gaming is pursued. Communities and businesses: casinos, vendors, employees, and patrons connected to tribal gaming may see operational or regulatory changes. Legal/administrative: removing the named Restoration Act provisions reduces statutory ambiguity created by court decisions; it may resolve litigation risk and clarify jurisdiction. Budgetary impact: the amendment itself does not appropriate funds or authorize direct federal spending; administrative costs for oversight would follow existing IGRA authorities and agency budgets. Timing: no specific effective date is stated in the provided text, so implementation would follow enactment procedures.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
