The court held that the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act abrogates tribal sovereign immunity for suits initiated by any Indian tribe, regardless of whether that tribe is a party to the relevant tribal-state compact. This allows the Comanche Nation to proceed with its official-capacity claims under IGRA.
However, the court rejected the Nation’s argument that the Ex Parte Young doctrine displaces tribal immunity for its RICO claims seeking injunctive relief. The court found the Nation failed to allege that the defendants had a specific duty to operate the casino, meaning the officials were not the proper targets for an Ex Parte Young suit.
Regarding the Nation’s individual-capacity RICO claims for damages, the court held that the officials are the real parties in interest. Because the judgment would bind the individuals for their alleged personal wrongdoing, they cannot raise the Tribe’s sovereign immunity as a defense.
The dispute centers on the Warm Springs Casino, opened by the Fort Sill Apache Tribe in 2022 on the Tsalote Allotment. The Comanche Nation, which operates competing casinos nearby, sued to enjoin the casino’s operation, alleging it violated federal law and the Tribe’s gaming compact with Oklahoma by operating on lands it did not own.
The Tenth Circuit exercised jurisdiction under the collateral-order doctrine, noting that the district court explicitly denied tribal immunity on the RICO claim and implicitly denied it on the IGRA claim by declining to dismiss the suit on those grounds.
The court affirmed the district court’s denial of the motion to dismiss regarding the IGRA claims but reversed the denial of immunity for the official-capacity RICO claims. The officials’ alternative argument for qualified immunity was not addressed because the court lacked jurisdiction to review it on this interlocutory appeal.