SAN FRANCISCO -- The California Supreme Court agreed Wednesday to decide whether California's tribes, some of the state's biggest political donors, are bound by campaign-finance disclosure rules.

Without comment, the seven justices unanimously agreed to review an appeals court's March decision that said tribes were subject to campaign-finance enforcement lawsuits from the Fair Political Practices Commission, the state agency that oversees elections.

The case is significant for California's political culture. The Golden State's more than 100 tribes -- some flush with casino revenue -- are major campaign donors, having given $130 million to candidate and ballot measure campaigns since 1998.

Most of the tribes comply with the regulations that demand disclosure of donations of at least $10,000 a year, but its unclear whether they would continue if the state loses its case.

A tribal attorney said the case extends beyond campaign finance rules, and opens the door to state regulations if California prevails.

The tribes maintain they are sovereign governments immune from most state intervention, including lawsuits to enforce state laws.

The case before the Supreme Court was brought by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians, which challenged an enforcement action from the FPPC. The tribe asserted that, as a sovereign nation, it could not be sued in court to comply with disclosure rules.

The 3rd District Court of Appeal in Sacramento disagreed, ruling 2-1 that "the constitutional right of the state to sue to preserve its republican form of government trumps the common law doctrine of tribal immunity."

Art Bunce, the tribe's attorney, said only Congress or the tribes themselves can waive their sovereign immunity and subject the tribes to state lawsuits or laws.

"This case is about whether state courts are at liberty to invent a third source of a waiver of a tribe's immunity, that being a state appeals court," Bunce said.

Steven Russo, chief of the Fair Political Practices Commission's enforcement bureau, said the appeals court's decision, if it stands, means the tribes must comply with the disclosure rules.

"Our contention is, and the 3rd District Court of Appeal agreed with us, that California's sovereignty trumps any sovereign immunity that the tribes have and California can enforce its campaign enforcement law on them," he said.

The commission, in its lawsuit, alleges the Agua Caliente tribe was late in disclosing more than $8 million in donations to candidates and causes between 1998 and 2002 in violation of the 1974 Political Reform Act. The tribe posts campaign finance reports on its Web site and contends it discloses its political activity -- just not according to the state's rules.

By law, the commission can fine an organization for the amount improperly reported. The commission has not determined how much it is seeking, Russo said.

Agua Caliente, the only California tribe with two casinos, both in the Palm Springs area, has given more than $12 million to California political campaigns over the past six years.

The court did not indicate when it would hear the case, Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Superior Court, S123832.

KTVU
NQR