44 Cited authorities

Engle v. Isaac
456 U.S. 107 (1982) Cited 6,408 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding burden to demonstrate cause and prejudice is far "greater than the showing required to establish plain error on direct appeal"
Sossamon v. Texas
563 U.S. 277 (2011) Cited 1,642 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding RLUIPA's authorization of "appropriate relief" did not "clearly and unambiguously waive sovereign immunity to private suits for damages"
Alden v. Maine
527 U.S. 706 (1999) Cited 2,323 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that sovereign immunity prohibits a private citizen from suing a State in state court
Auer v. Robbins
519 U.S. 452 (1997) Cited 2,342 times 90 Legal Analyses
Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. Doe
519 U.S. 425 (1997) Cited 1,612 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that a state university was entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity despite the fact that the federal government had agreed to fully indemnify the university against the cost of litigation, including adverse judgments
Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
25 Cal.4th 826 (Cal. 2001) Cited 4,868 times 2 Legal Analyses
Concluding that the gathering and dissemination of pricing information by the petroleum companies through an independent industry service did not imply collusive action where there was no evidence the information was misused as a basis for an unlawful conspiracy; rather, evidence suggested that individual companies used all available resources “to determine capacity, supply, and pricing decisions which would maximize their own individual profits”
Mich. v. Bay Mills Indian Cmty.
572 U.S. 782 (2014) Cited 452 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that tribal immunity extends to "suits arising from a tribe’s commercial activities, even when they take place off Indian lands"
Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v. Manufacturing Technologies
523 U.S. 751 (1998) Cited 648 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that “an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity”
Hess v. Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corp.
513 U.S. 30 (1994) Cited 718 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Port Authority does not enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity despite the fact that "[s]tate courts . . . repeatedly have typed the Port Authority an agency of the States rather than a municipal unit or local district"
Federal Maritime Comm'n v. South Carolina Ports A.
535 U.S. 743 (2002) Cited 550 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that Congress may not use "Article I powers to create court-like administrative tribunals where sovereign immunity does not apply"
Section 1746 - Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury
28 U.S.C. § 1746 Cited 10,105 times 17 Legal Analyses
Permitting the use of declarations instead
Section 1601 - Congressional findings and declaration of purpose
15 U.S.C. § 1601 Cited 7,823 times 54 Legal Analyses
Explaining that TILA's disclosure requirements exist “so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit”
Section 2701 - Findings
25 U.S.C. § 2701 Cited 819 times 19 Legal Analyses
Finding that “[f]ederal courts have held that section 81 of this title requires Secretarial review of management contracts dealing with Indian gaming, but does not provide standards for approval of such contracts”
Section 41 - Federal Trade Commission established; membership; vacancies; seal
15 U.S.C. § 41 Cited 781 times 46 Legal Analyses
Granting FTC the power to "make rules and regulations for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this [Act]," 15 U.S.C. § 46(g) (West Supp. 1986)
Section 2710 - Tribal gaming ordinances
25 U.S.C. § 2710 Cited 690 times 16 Legal Analyses
Providing "[n]et revenues . . . may be used to make per capita payments . . . only if" the tribe has already prepared a plan to meet its government essential services
Section 2702 - Declaration of policy
25 U.S.C. § 2702 Cited 281 times
Explaining that Congress' purpose in enacting IGRA was "to provide a statutory basis for the operation of gaming by Indian tribes as a means of promoting tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments"
Section 477 - Transferred
25 U.S.C. § 477 Cited 135 times 1 Legal Analyses
Barring contributions in connection "with any election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office"

PEOPLE v. MIAMI NATION ENTERPRISES

44 Cited authorities

Holding burden to demonstrate cause and prejudice is far "greater than the showing required to establish plain error on direct appeal"

Holding RLUIPA's authorization of "appropriate relief" did not "clearly and unambiguously waive sovereign immunity to private suits for damages"

Holding that sovereign immunity prohibits a private citizen from suing a State in state court

Holding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"

Holding that a state university was entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity despite the fact that the federal government had agreed to fully indemnify the university against the cost of litigation, including adverse judgments

Holding that tribal immunity extends to "suits arising from a tribe’s commercial activities, even when they take place off Indian lands"

Holding that “an Indian tribe is subject to suit only where Congress has authorized the suit or the tribe has waived its immunity”

Holding that the Port Authority does not enjoy Eleventh Amendment immunity despite the fact that "[s]tate courts . . . repeatedly have typed the Port Authority an agency of the States rather than a municipal unit or local district"

Holding that Congress may not use "Article I powers to create court-like administrative tribunals where sovereign immunity does not apply"

Permitting the use of declarations instead

Explaining that TILA's disclosure requirements exist “so that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms available to him and avoid the uninformed use of credit”

Finding that “[f]ederal courts have held that section 81 of this title requires Secretarial review of management contracts dealing with Indian gaming, but does not provide standards for approval of such contracts”

Granting FTC the power to "make rules and regulations for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this [Act]," 15 U.S.C. § 46(g) (West Supp. 1986)

Providing "[n]et revenues . . . may be used to make per capita payments . . . only if" the tribe has already prepared a plan to meet its government essential services

Explaining that Congress' purpose in enacting IGRA was "to provide a statutory basis for the operation of gaming by Indian tribes as a means of promoting tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments"

Barring contributions in connection "with any election to any political office, or in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office"