Whether the Secretary may conclude that a casino would not be detrimental to the surrounding community' despite uncontroverted evidence the casino will have unmitigated detrimental impacts

QUESTIONS PRESENTED This case presents the following exceptionally important questions of federal law: 1. Subject to certain exceptions, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (““IGRA,” 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701 et seq.) expressly prohibits casino gaming on land acquired by the Secretary of the Interior into trust for Indian tribes after 1988 (so-called “off-reservation” land). 25 U.S.C. § 2719(a). Under the exception applicable here, a tribe may conduct gaming on off-reservation land if, among other requirements, the Secretary determines that gaming “would be in the best interest of the Indian tribe and its members,” and “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community. .. .” 25 U.S.C. § 2719(b)(1)(A). This case presents the question whether the Secretary may conclude that a casino “would not be detrimental to the surrounding community” despite uncontroverted evidence the casino will have unmitigated detrimental impacts to the community. 2. The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 (“IRA,” 25 U.S.C. §§ 5101 et seq.) authorizes the Secretary to take land into trust “for the purpose of providing land for Indians.” 25 U.S.C. § 5108. As relevant here, the IRA defines “Indian” to include “all persons of Indian descent who are members of any recognized Indian tribe now under Federal jurisdiction.” Ibid. This case presents the question whether multiple Indians residing on the same reservation are, per se, an “Indian tribe” irrespective of the individual Indians’ tribal affiliations, if any.