Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-493_jgko.pdf
Page Number: 28.0

4 

YSLETA DEL SUR PUEBLO v. TEXAS 

ROBERTS, C. J., dissenting 

See  101  Stat.  666;  see  also  Ysleta  del  Sur  Pueblo,  220 
F. Supp.  2d,  at  677–679.    The  Act  contains  various  provi-
sions setting forth the relationship between the Tribe, the 
State of Texas, and the United States.  Two statutory pro-
visions are particularly pertinent.  The first addresses gen-
eral  application  of  Texas  law  on  the  reservation,  and  the
second  addresses  the  more  specific  application  of  Texas’s 
gaming laws.

First,  in  §105(f )  of  the  Act,  Congress  made  the  Public 
Law 280 framework applicable to the Ysleta del Sur Pueblo.
101 Stat. 668.  The Tribe, Texas, and the United States all 
embrace this interpretation of the Act.  See Brief for Peti-
tioners 25; Brief for Respondent 18; Brief for United States 
as Amicus Curiae 12.  Public Law 280 allows certain States 
to apply in full their criminal laws, and some of their civil
laws, on tribal lands.  See Bryan v. Itasca County, 426 U. S. 
373 (1976); see also ante, at 3–4.  The law was designed to
address “the problem of lawlessness on certain Indian res-
ervations.”  Bryan, 426 U. S., at 379.  In California v. Cab-
azon  Band  of  Mission  Indians,  480  U. S.  202  (1987),  the 
Court interpreted Public Law 280 to mean that state laws
that are “ ‘criminal/prohibitory’ ” apply on designated reser-
vations, whereas those laws that are merely “ ‘civil/regula-
tory’ ”  do  not,  id.,  at  209.    Put  differently,  we  said,  “if  the 
intent of a state law is generally to prohibit certain conduct, 
it falls within Pub. L. 280’s grant of criminal jurisdiction [to 
the State], but if the state law generally permits the con-
duct at issue, subject to regulation, it must be classified as
civil/regulatory and Pub. L. 280 does not authorize its en-
forcement on an Indian reservation.”  Ibid.  Because §105(f ) 
grants Texas Public Law 280 authority on Pueblo lands, the 
State may directly enforce all of its laws that generally pro-
hibit conduct. 

Second, Congress adopted a more specific rule to govern 
gaming on the reservation, which is set forth at §107 of the
Restoration  Act.  The  provision  has  three  parts.    Section