Post by blackcrowheart on Nov 30, 2005 10:35:29 GMT -5
www.nynewsday.com/news/local/state/ny-stgamb294531878nov29,0,639360.story?coll=ny-statenews-print
Gambling foes out of chips
U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear suit challenging NY's right to approve casinos on Indian land
BY ERROL A. thingyFIELD JR
ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF
November 29, 2005
ALBANY -- Delivering a crippling blow to a campaign to end government-sanctioned gambling, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday refused to hear a suit that challenged the state's constitutional right to approve casinos on Indian land.
The court's decision was a triumph for Gov. George Pataki, a Republican who has sought to dramatically expand casino gambling to help the state pay its bills.
The development also em boldened gambling initiatives by Indian tribes throughout the state, and on Long Island, where the Shinnethingy Indian Nation of Southampton is pursuing a legal claim to establish a casino in Hampton Bays.
While the court did not rule on the substance of the suit, gambling opponents agreed yesterday that the court's move exhausted their legal remedies, especially after previous defeats in lower courts. The suit was initially filed in 2002.
"There's no place left to go," said Cornelius Murray, an Albany-based attorney who represented a coalition of anti-gambling groups in the case. "It's the proverbial end of the line."
The Court of Appeals, New York State's highest court, ruled in May that even though New York's constitution prohibits commercialized gambling, federal law supersedes local statutes by allowing exceptions for federally recognized Indian tribes.
"We're very pleased with the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the law, allowing us to continue creating the jobs and spurring economic development important to the people all across the state," said Saleem Cheeks, a Pataki spokesman.
Since 2001, when state revenues slowed following the 9/11 attacks, Pataki and the State Legislature have embraced casino gambling as a solution to balancing its books. That year the legislature approved a law allowing the governor to pen deals with Indian tribes authorizing casinos.
Earlier this year the governor proposed establishing five casinos in the Catskills but scaled the proposal back to one amid strong public opposition and a federal ruling in March that required the Oneida Indian Nation to pay taxes on land the tribe acquired outside of its federal reservation. The state now has four casinos.
Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, an upstate Republican, has also been an ardent supporter of casinos, arguing that the revenue can help the state generate billions of dollars it needs to address aid equity in public schools.
Bruno has said the state needs to capture revenue that is already headed out of New York to gambling centers in New Jersey and Connecticut.
For the Shinnethingy, the certainty of a casino remains an open question. Earlier this month, a federal judge recognized the nation as a tribe, but the state has argued the Shinnethingys must be recognized by the U.S. Department of the Interior before the state could endorse a casino. The case is now headed to trial.
Outside of the courts, gambling opponents say they will continue to try to build public support against state-sponsored casinos. The state is turning to an easy answer and ignoring the social negatives of gambling, they say.
"People are going to have to wake up and realize this is a very destructive trend," said state Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose), one of the challengers in the case and a vocal critic of the state's efforts to use casino gambling as a way to increase revenue. "When they do that then the lawmakers are going to start to pay attention."
Gambling foes out of chips
U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear suit challenging NY's right to approve casinos on Indian land
BY ERROL A. thingyFIELD JR
ALBANY BUREAU CHIEF
November 29, 2005
ALBANY -- Delivering a crippling blow to a campaign to end government-sanctioned gambling, the U.S. Supreme Court yesterday refused to hear a suit that challenged the state's constitutional right to approve casinos on Indian land.
The court's decision was a triumph for Gov. George Pataki, a Republican who has sought to dramatically expand casino gambling to help the state pay its bills.
The development also em boldened gambling initiatives by Indian tribes throughout the state, and on Long Island, where the Shinnethingy Indian Nation of Southampton is pursuing a legal claim to establish a casino in Hampton Bays.
While the court did not rule on the substance of the suit, gambling opponents agreed yesterday that the court's move exhausted their legal remedies, especially after previous defeats in lower courts. The suit was initially filed in 2002.
"There's no place left to go," said Cornelius Murray, an Albany-based attorney who represented a coalition of anti-gambling groups in the case. "It's the proverbial end of the line."
The Court of Appeals, New York State's highest court, ruled in May that even though New York's constitution prohibits commercialized gambling, federal law supersedes local statutes by allowing exceptions for federally recognized Indian tribes.
"We're very pleased with the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the law, allowing us to continue creating the jobs and spurring economic development important to the people all across the state," said Saleem Cheeks, a Pataki spokesman.
Since 2001, when state revenues slowed following the 9/11 attacks, Pataki and the State Legislature have embraced casino gambling as a solution to balancing its books. That year the legislature approved a law allowing the governor to pen deals with Indian tribes authorizing casinos.
Earlier this year the governor proposed establishing five casinos in the Catskills but scaled the proposal back to one amid strong public opposition and a federal ruling in March that required the Oneida Indian Nation to pay taxes on land the tribe acquired outside of its federal reservation. The state now has four casinos.
Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno, an upstate Republican, has also been an ardent supporter of casinos, arguing that the revenue can help the state generate billions of dollars it needs to address aid equity in public schools.
Bruno has said the state needs to capture revenue that is already headed out of New York to gambling centers in New Jersey and Connecticut.
For the Shinnethingy, the certainty of a casino remains an open question. Earlier this month, a federal judge recognized the nation as a tribe, but the state has argued the Shinnethingys must be recognized by the U.S. Department of the Interior before the state could endorse a casino. The case is now headed to trial.
Outside of the courts, gambling opponents say they will continue to try to build public support against state-sponsored casinos. The state is turning to an easy answer and ignoring the social negatives of gambling, they say.
"People are going to have to wake up and realize this is a very destructive trend," said state Sen. Frank Padavan (R-Bellerose), one of the challengers in the case and a vocal critic of the state's efforts to use casino gambling as a way to increase revenue. "When they do that then the lawmakers are going to start to pay attention."