## Facts

- The Wyandotte Nation is a federally recognized tribe that obtained monetary relief for historic land-related claims through Indian Claims Commission proceedings.
- Congress enacted Public Law 98-602 to implement the judgments and directed that a portion of the award (about $100,000) be used to purchase land to be taken into trust for the tribe.
- The tribe used these funds to acquire parcels including the “Shriner Tract” in Kansas City, Kansas, which the United States took into trust for the tribe.
- Under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), gaming is generally prohibited on lands acquired in trust after October 17, 1988, subject to statutory exceptions.
- The tribe sought approval to conduct Class II gaming on the Shriner Tract; the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) issued a final agency decision concluding that no IGRA exception applied and gaming was barred.
- NIGC interpreted IGRA’s “settlement of a land claim” exception to require a settlement involving return of specific land, not a monetary award later used to purchase different land.
- The tribe sought judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), arguing the Shriner Tract qualified under IGRA’s “last reservation,” “settlement of a land claim,” and “restoration of lands” exceptions, and that NIGC failed to account for Public Law 98-602’s directive linking the judgment funds to trust land acquisition.
- The tribe also pointed to agency treatment of another tribe’s judgment-funded land purchases as inconsistent with NIGC’s restrictive approach here.

## Issues

1. Whether NIGC acted arbitrarily and capriciously under the APA by concluding the Shriner Tract was ineligible for gaming under IGRA’s “settlement of a land claim” exception.
2. Whether NIGC’s application of IGRA’s “last reservation,” “settlement of a land claim,” and “restoration of lands” exceptions to the Shriner Tract was lawful in light of IGRA, Public Law 98-602, and reasoned agency decision-making requirements.

## Decision

- The court held that NIGC’s determination regarding IGRA’s “settlement of a land claim” exception was arbitrary and capricious.
- The court rejected NIGC’s categorical limitation of “land claim” to claims seeking return of specific land.
- The court reversed the agency decision on that ground and remanded to NIGC for further proceedings consistent with the opinion.

## Legal Principles

- Under the APA, agency action is unlawful if it is arbitrary and capricious, including where the agency fails to consider important aspects of the problem, offers an explanation contrary to the record, relies on improper factors, or provides an implausible rationale.
- IGRA’s “settlement of a land claim” exception is not limited, by its text, to settlements that return the same land at issue; it may include land-title claims resolved through monetary compensation.
- When Congress creates a statutory scheme linking judgment funds to the purchase of trust land, an agency must account for that linkage when applying IGRA’s exceptions.
- An agency’s unexplained inconsistency with analogous prior practice can support a finding that its decision is arbitrary and capricious.

## Conclusion

The court set aside NIGC’s refusal to treat the Shriner Tract as land acquired in connection with the settlement of a land claim, holding that NIGC applied an unjustifiably narrow interpretation and failed to provide a reasoned explanation consistent with IGRA and Public Law 98-602, and it remanded for further agency action.


Wyandotte Nation v. Nat’l Indian Gaming Comm’n, 437 F. Supp. 2d 1193 (D. Kan. 2006)