Tennessee
How California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians applies in Tennessee: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Native American Law.
Tennessee recognizes the principle established in California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians regarding tribal sovereignty and the regulation of tribal gaming. However, Tennessee's gaming laws are more restrictive compared to the permissive stance taken by California in this case.
The specific rule as applied in Tennessee is that while tribal entities enjoy certain self-governing rights, they must still comply with state laws unless expressly exempted by federal law.
Held that state laws regulating gaming could apply to Indian tribes unless superseded by federal legislation.
Affirmed that tribal sovereignty permits certain self-governing activities but is still subject to state taxation and assessment regulations.
Determined that local jurisdictions have the authority to regulate tribal businesses under specific conditions.
Tennessee’s approach aligns in principle with the federal standard established by California v. Cabazon, affirming tribal sovereignty. However, Tennessee enforces more stringent regulations regarding gaming and economic activities on tribal lands compared to the federal approach, which offers broader leeway for tribal operations.
The principles from California v. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians may appear on the Tennessee bar exam in the context of questions about tribal sovereignty and state regulation of tribal activities.