By Christine Hanley
ASSOCIATED PRESS

July 22, 1998

FRESNO, Calif. -- As members of seven area Indian tribes rallied outside the federal courthouse, a judge on Wednesday rejected the government's attempt to confiscate video slot machines at their casinos.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii ruled that the tribes should be allowed to keep possession of the gambling devices while the state's complex and murky debate over Indian gambling evolves.

"I am still convinced things should remain status quo," Ishii said after hearing arguments from two federal prosecutors and a host of lawyers representing the tribes.

Still, the judge set an Oct. 2 date for pretrial forfeiture hearings to go forward against five of the tribes, postponing such proceedings for two that have claims of bad faith negotiations pending against the state.

Ishii's ruling is the latest in a labyrinth of legal proceedings involving about 30 California tribes and being carried out fitfully on various judicial and legislative levels.

Just two days earlier, for example, a federal judge in Los Angeles said he was inclined to issue a permanent injunction barring nine southern tribes from operating video slots, and would make a final ruling Sept. 15.

In that tentative ruling, U.S. District Judge J. Spencer Letts agreed with federal prosecutors that tribes cannot operate gaming machines without a compact with the state.

Ishii, despite hearing similar arguments from federal prosecutors, said he could not go that far, noting that the question of the legality of the video machines strikes at the core of the unresolved debate.

"That's still a major question," he said.

Gov. Pete Wilson contends the video slots are illegal and has signed a model compact with a handful of tribes that limits the number of casinos and electronic machines.

The compacts, which are required under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988, will remain invalid unless the Legislature ratifies them.

The majority of California's tribes say the compact has too many restrictions and have put an initiative on the November ballot that would allow them to keep current machines and require the governor to negotiate without preconditions.

Wilson has refused to negotiate with tribes he contended were violating state law by operating illegal slot machines.

Meanwhile, civil forfeiture lawsuits were filed in the four federal judicial districts in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco and Sacramento to seize or halt operation of video slot machines.

The Sacramento case was moved to Fresno, where seven tribes or bands that operate casinos in the Eastern District oppose the compact. They are: the Susanville, Tule River, Berry Creek, Pit River, Bishop Paiute, Colusa, Santa Rose and Tachi-Yokuts.

While sign-toting members of these tribes picketed outside federal court Wednesday, their attorneys sought injunctions blocking the forfeiture hearings.

Before his hearing began, Ishii pointed out the ongoing web of proceedings in explaining why he would only address issues that were directly related to the request for immediate seizure of video slots.

"It would be futile to attempt to resolve issues that might change in the next couple of months," he said.

Later, the judge had to remind attorneys about this during one back-and-forth stretch, saying although the arguments were important they "only serve to show me just how richly complex this case is."

Although Ishii ruled that the slot machines could not be immediately confiscated by the government, he scheduled forfeiture cases to go forward against all but the Berry Creek and Bishop Paiute tribes.

But it remains unclear just how the Fresno case will proceed.

Federal prosecutors plan to seek a quick ruling on their application for confiscation, and other tribes hinted they would pursue bad faith claims against the state.

Link to: California's Modern Indian War