Foes ask judge for shutdown of Seneca's Buffalo Creek Casino
But Senecas say ruling didn’t order stoppage
By T. J. Pignataro and Michael Beebe NEWS STAFF REPORTERS
Updated: 07/15/08 10:25 AM
-
- “It seems to me quite logical that having issued the decision, the judge would enforce it.” Joel Rose, co-chairman of Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County
Opponents of the Seneca Nation’s Seneca Buffalo Creek Casino asked U. S. District Judge William M. Skretny Monday to go as far as to direct the U. S. Marshals Service, if necessary, to permanently shut down gambling at the Seneca’s downtown Buffalo site.
The Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County filed a motion in federal court requesting an expedited hearing on their motion for Skretny to issue an order enforcing his judgment last week that gambling on the nine-acre site is illegal.
“His decision to any lawyer is very clear and unequivocal,” said Richard J. Lippes, co-counsel with Albany attorney Cornelius D. Murray. “The Senecas and the federal government, should it choose to support them, are going to have to answer why they are still operating.
“There is no question they are gambling illegally,” Lippes said.
Attorneys for the National Indian Gaming Commission and the U. S. Justice Department have declined so far to comment, and could not be reached immediately for comment on the motion.
Maurice A. John Sr., the president of the Seneca Nation of Indians, stressed Monday that the nation itself is not a party to the lawsuit. After last week’s decision, the nation announced it would be continuing its operations “business as usual” at the casino site.
The Senecas say Skretny’s decision didn’t include an order to stop operating the casino.
Joel Rose, co-chairman of Citizens Against Casino Gambling in Erie County, is puzzled by the Senecas’ position to continue downtown gaming in light of last week’s ruling.
“My question is what part of ‘illegal’ don’t they understand?” Rose asked.
According to John, however, Monday’s motion by casino opponents can have no effect before at least July 23.
“Despite the plaintiffs’ zeal to keep this case in the media, our legal advisers say the plaintiffs have to wait 10 business days after the original decision before any enforcement proceedings can commence,” John said.
“The nation is currently abiding by the court’s decision and has maintained all along that it would follow the directions of the court and the federal agencies involved, and that has not changed.”
In Monday’s affidavit supporting the motion for Skretny to issue an order enforcing his judgment, Murray claims that continuing gambling at the temporary casino is “not only a violation of this court’s judgment, but it is an illegal and unlawful activity under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.”
“Unless and until the illegal . . . gambling at the site is stopped, it appears that the tribe will continue to act as if this court’s decision was an irrelevant academic exercise and that there is nothing that can be done to stop them,” Murray argues.
He goes on to request Skretny to order the chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission to order “the immediate and permanent closure” at the Buffalo site and, if the chairman fails to do so, requests that U. S. marshals “be directed to take such action as is reasonably necessary in order to ensure that such gambling be immediately and permanently stopped.”
Rose says he is confident Skretny will enforce his own ruling. “It seems to me quite logical that having issued the decision, the judge would enforce it,” Rose said.
Meanwhile, New York State is continuing to staff the casino with inspectors from the state Racing and Wagering Board — a move that was praised by the Senecas on Monday.
“The nation thanks Gov. [David A.] Paterson and the lawyers of the state wagering board for their support of the nation’s interpretation of the federal court ruling,” John said. “The court’s decision included no order to cease casino operations so the nation is, in fact, meeting the requirements of that decision.”
The Buffalo News reported over the weekend that the state’s argument was that as long as the Senecas continued to run the casino, it would have its inspectors on hand.
Skretny’s ruling held that the nine-acre parcel off Michigan Avenue was sovereign Indian territory, but did not meet the exception for off-reservation casinos as required by the 1988 National Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
He ruled that using money from the Seneca Nation Settlement Act of 1990, a congressional law that repaid the Senecas for 99 years of undervalued leases, was not part of a land settlement claim, as required by the gaming act.
tpignataro@buffnews.com and mbeebe@buffnews.com
