The Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians has won its lawsuit for the right to offer gaming on a parcel of land that houses Kewadin Shores Casino in St. Ignace.

The tribe has been operating in its new casino in St. Ignace for approximately one year under a preliminary injunction issued by the court last August, which restrained the United States from taking any action to close the new casino, pending the outcome of the case.

United States District Judge R. Allan Edgar ruled in favor of the tribe Friday, August 29, determining the parcel of land taken into trust for the tribe is eligible for gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). The court's opinion eliminates any uncertainty about whether the casino property is eligible for gaming.

The act is a federal statute that regulates Indian gaming. Under IGRA, gaming may not take place on lands taken into trust after October 17, 1988, unless the land falls within one of the exceptions: If the land is contiguous to the reservation on that date, or if the land is restored lands to a restored tribe. Judge Edgar ruled that the St. Ignace land is contiguous to the tribe's reservation and, therefore, is eligible for casino gaming.

Beginning in 2003, the tribe made plans to replace its casino in St. Ignace. The old casino was built in the mid-1980s on a parcel of land taken into trust in 1983. The tribe built a new casino in 2006, located partially on the 1983 parcel and partially on land taken into trust for the tribe in 2000.

The tribe's position has always been that the 2000 parcel is eligible for gaming under IGRA. The act allows gaming on land taken into trust after October 17, 1988, if the contiguous parcel was a reservation before that date. Over a period of three years, the tribe attempted to convince the Department of the Interior and the National Indian Gaming Commission that the 1983 parcel is a reservation within the meaning of IGRA. The Department of the Interior and the gaming commission disagreed, resulting in the tribe's suit against those two agencies, filed on November 9, 2006.

In ruling against the United States, the Department of the Interior, and the gaming commission, Judge Edgar found that the Department of the Interior has been inconsistent in its interpretation of the word "reservation." He concluded that the 1983 parcel is a reservation, and therefore, gaming may take place at the casino partially located on the contiguous 2000 parcel.