## Facts

- Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians is a federally recognized tribe with a reservation in San Diego County, California.
- The Tribal Council enacted an ordinance authorizing bingo on the reservation subject to tribal restrictions.
- The tribe contracted with a management company to operate the bingo enterprise on tribal land.
- San Diego County officials notified the tribe that county bingo rules prohibited the operation and stated the rules would be enforced through entry onto the reservation to cite or arrest participants.
- The tribe sued the county sheriff for declaratory and injunctive relief, alleging the sheriff lacked authority to enforce state and county bingo laws on the reservation.

## Issues

1. Whether California’s bingo statute and San Diego County’s bingo ordinance are “criminal/prohibitory” or “civil/regulatory” under Public Law 280.
2. Whether, absent explicit federal authorization, state and county officials may enforce those bingo provisions against a tribally authorized, on-reservation bingo operation.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court’s summary judgment for the county and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for the tribe.
- The court held the state statute and county ordinance were civil/regulatory, not criminal/prohibitory.
- Because the laws were regulatory, Public Law 280 did not authorize their enforcement on the reservation.
- The sheriff therefore lacked authority to enter the reservation to enforce the state and county bingo provisions against the tribal operation.

## Legal Principles

- Under Public Law 280, a state may enforce criminal/prohibitory laws in Indian country but may not apply civil/regulatory laws there without clear congressional authorization.
- A law is criminal/prohibitory if it reflects a policy of generally forbidding the conduct; it is civil/regulatory if the conduct is generally permitted subject to conditions and operational limits.
- Where state jurisdiction over tribal affairs is ambiguous, federal Indian law canons counsel construing the scope of state power narrowly and in favor of tribal self-government.

## Conclusion

Because California and San Diego County permitted bingo subject to restrictions rather than banning it as a matter of public policy, their bingo provisions were civil/regulatory and could not be enforced on the Barona Reservation under Public Law 280; the tribe was entitled to judgment barring the sheriff from enforcing those measures on-reservation absent explicit federal authorization.


Barona Grp. of the Capitan Grande Band of Mission Indians v. Duffy, 694 F.2d 1185 (9th Cir. 1982)