I like the law. Even
I like the law. Even when watching it in the third person, (i.e., its someone elses case) it’s intellectually exciting. But that said, there are stereotypes at work throughout the field that mold practices and careers. The Ninth Circuit is wierd. Idaho is too far off the beaten path to be at the cutting edge of law. Tribal courts and jurisdiction are a historical anachronism. Indian tribes sell cigarettes and host tacky little casinos, dooming themselves to the bottom rungs of a service economy.
Then along comes an innovative tribe, the Couer d’Alene, putting together a national tele-lottery (and maybe some legal internet gaming), something that no non-tribe has been able to pull off yet. So a bunch of state Attorneys General, blatantly protecting the lottery systems of their own states, put pressure on AT&T to deny them service. Lots and lots of litigation, both in the tribal court and the federal district court occur. AT&T and its powerful friends look like they’re winning. The case finally arrives at the Ninth Circuit. The Court of Appeals uses phrases like the district court — apparantly eager to provide AT&T and the various states breathing down the corporation’s neck with a definitive answer regarding the Lottery’s legality — completely sidestepped two crucial considerations and [w]hat the District Court failed to grasp. AT&T and the self-righteous (not to mention, conflicted) states are slapped down.
According to the opinion, there are other cases pending on the internet aspect of the Couer d’Alene plan, and there’s always the possibility that this will be further appealed and overturned. But for today, the first day of spring, it’s fun to see. A tribe making the first big U.S. entry into internet gaming. Northern Idaho being on the front burner. And yes, an underdog winning.
