DISCLAIMER:  Any unofficial case summaries below are prepared by the clerk's office
                        as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.

181271P.pdf   09/06/2019  Flandreau Santee Sioux Tribe  v.  Kristi Noem
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  18-1271
   U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota - Sioux Falls   
[PUBLISHED] [Loken, Author, with Colloton and Kelly, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The Tribe failed to remit the State of South Dakota's use tax on goods and services sold to nonmembers at the Tribe's Casino and related store, and the State's Department of Revenue denied the Tribe's applications for renewal of the alcoholic beverage licenses issued to the casino and the store. The Tribe filed this action alleging the imposition of the use tax on purchases by nonmembers on reservation land was preempted by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and that conditioning renewal of the Tribe's alcohol licenses on use tax remittance violated 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1161. The district court concluded the state could not collect the tax on the sale of amenities in the casino but could collect the tax on sales of goods and services to nonmembers at the store. The court further determined that the state could not condition renewal of the liquor licenses on remittance of the taxes due on store sales. Held: The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act does not expressly preempt the imposition of the use tax on nonmember purchases throughout the casino but under relevant Supreme Court precedent, the tax is preempted because the revenues generated by the sales of the amenities contribute significantly to the economic success of the Tribe's Category III gaming at the casino, and imposition of the tax would be contrary to the Act's broad policies of increasing tribal revenue and ensuring the tribes are the primary beneficiaries of gaming revenue; the State may condition renewal of the alcoholic beverage licenses on the Tribe's failure to remit the validly imposed portions of the use tax, and the district court's holding that it could not, is reversed. Judge Colloton, concurring in part and dissenting in part.