Some states are trying to undermine tribal sovereign immunity by challenging the status of off- reservation Indian commercial activity. Civil claims of employee rights, contracts or personal injury are becoming common. The State of Minnesota litigated against the Mdewakanton Dakota tribe, arguing the tribal entity that owns a bingo parlor, Little Six, Inc., is a commercial business enterprise and not a tribal governmental agency. While the court ruled in favor of the Mdewakanton and concluded that Little Six, Inc. has sovereign immunity from civil suits, it opened up the question for further judicial review. The most visible and media focused issue relating to Indian sovereignty is taxation on Indian gaming.
States view money generated by Indian tribes through gaming as a potential tax revenue.
States are targeting tribes both legally and in the public media as sources of untapped revenue. A state tactic has been to use political blackmail to attempt to force tribes into negotiations over gaming taxes. One such effort is being employed by Minnesota, where it has been suggested that allowing non- Indian gaming in competition with Indian tribes may be inevitable unless tax agreements are reached. Minnesota's gaming compacts with Indian tribes have no expiration date, and cannot be reviewed without tribal consent. Many American Indian officials said they signed the compacts because they were concerned that without a legal contract they would be ordered to shut down the casinos.