news-record.com

Last week's N.C. Court of Appeals ruling in the video poker case boiled down to common sense. Video poker companies contended they should be allowed to operate throughout North Carolina as long as the Cherokees can offer video gaming in their casino. The state insisted no, they can't.

A major point of dispute was language in federal law that says such gaming activities "shall be lawful on Indian lands only if such activities are ... located in a State that permits such gaming for any purpose by any person, organization, or entity."

The industry said that means the Cherokees can do it only if anyone can do it; therefore, North Carolina can't ban its video poker machines unless it also bans the Cherokees'.

Earlier this year, Superior Court Judge Howard Manning agreed with that interpretation.

The state appealed, asserting that, no, the federal law means, in this case, that "any person, organization, or entity" applies to the Cherokees themselves.

That does sounds like a circular argument: The Cherokees are allowed to offer gaming as long as the Cherokees are allowed to offer gaming. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeals properly declared the federal language "ambiguous." When the language of a law is ambiguous, the courts must try to determine the legislative intent and rule accordingly.

Here's where the common sense comes in. Looking at the legislative background of Indian gaming, the court found that Congress meant "to promote Indian gaming, not to limit it."

"It cannot be seriously disputed that IGRA -- titled the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act -- is a federal statute designed to benefit Indian tribes," Judge Robert C. Hunter wrote for a panel that also included Judges Martha Geer and Linda Stephens. In its declaration of policy, Congress provided that one of IGRA's purposes was to promote "tribal economic development, self-sufficiency, and strong tribal governments."

Other courts have drawn the same conclusion, our court noted, namely that Congress never gave any indication "that IGRA was intended to establish parity between the Indian and non-Indian gaming enterprises."

That's correct. It would make no sense for North Carolina to have granted special gaming rights to the Cherokees if anyone else could build a casino just down the road from Cherokee. For good or ill, Congress authorized states to grant gambling exclusivity to their Indian tribes.

North Carolina exercised that authority on behalf of the Cherokees, and our state legislature further clearly expressed its intent to not allow other gambling enterprises to operate elsewhere in the state (other than its own lottery, of course).

The Court of Appeals spoke clearly, forcefully and correctly. There should be no need for discretionary review by the N.C. Supreme Court.

The Cherokees are still in business; other video poker operators are out.