The Scotts Valley Band of Pomo Indians has initiated motions in three federal lawsuits aimed at dismissing actions taken by competing tribes that question its planned casino development in Vallejo. This move comes shortly after the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) admitted that its previous endorsement of the project might have involved a “legal error.”

The motions were filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, addressing cases in Lytton Rancheria of California v. U.S. Department of the Interior, United Auburn Indian Community v. U.S. Department of the Interior, and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation v. U.S. Department of the Interior. Each lawsuit aims to overturn the DOI’s decision made on January 10, which placed 160 acres of land in Vallejo into trust for Scotts Valley and affirmed the tribe’s eligibility to conduct gaming activities there.

Scotts Valley contends that these lawsuits cannot proceed without its involvement, yet insists that its tribal sovereign immunity prohibits involuntary participation. The tribe argues that this interplay necessitates dismissal according to established Supreme Court rulings. The tribe has only intervened to request dismissal according to federal civil procedure rules.The proposed casino features a $700 million, 24-hour gaming venue on a 160-acre property adjacent to Interstates 80 and 37 in Solano County. This expansive development will also encompass 24 single-family homes, a tribal administration building, a parking structure, and a 45-acre biological preserve.

The legal battle intensified after Judge Trevor McFadden rejected Scotts Valley’s bid to cease the DOI’s reassessment of the project in October. On Wednesday, the DOI indicated that its earlier approval might have been issued in error, advising the tribe it “would be ill-served” to depend on the previous gaming determination during the ongoing review. The agency noted that more information submitted by June 13, 2025, casts doubt on Scotts Valley’s historical and temporal ties to the site.

“These legal actions aim to obstruct our Tribe’s long-awaited path to economic self-sufficiency,” declared Scotts Valley Chairman Shawn Davis in a statement. “Scotts Valley will robustly safeguard its rights, future, and sovereignty. We will not be intimidated by rivals who prioritize profit over what is right.”

Davis further expressed that the tribe is dedicated to a project that aims to “uplift our Tribal members and the entire Vallejo community,” asserting, “Scotts Valley has awaited generations for the opportunity to restore what federal policies have stripped away.”

Patrick R. Bergin, the tribe’s legal counsel, emphasized that the trust land is crucial to its governance and economic development. “This is a critical moment. Scotts Valley is taking the most assertive action available to a sovereign Indian tribe to defend its land and future,” he added.

Competing tribes, including the operators of Cash Creek Casino, San Pablo Lytton Casino, and Thunder Valley Casino Resort, have consistently opposed the project. Yocha Dehe Chairman Anthony Roberts asserted that these lawsuits are merely “Scotts Valley’s latest effort to divert attention from the truth,” claiming the tribe’s filings lack merit. He emphasized that evidence will demonstrate that “Scotts Valley has no rightful claim to our Patwin homelands in Vallejo.”

Roberts dismissed historical claims related to a 19th-century Pomo leader, stating, “Let me be explicit. Augustine never resided in Vallejo and had no connection to this land or nearby areas. Scotts Valley’s assertions regarding Augustine are completely unfounded.”

Opposition to the casino project has also surfaced from Solano County, the State of California, and local Patwin tribes, all of whom prompted the DOI in March to revisit its earlier approval.

In his October ruling, McFadden noted that the DOI must afford Scotts Valley due process before revoking its eligibility permanently, yet he reiterated the agency’s authority to proceed with its review. “The Court’s ruling does not prevent the Interior from continuing its reconsideration, nor does it impede the Department from revoking the Band’s gaming eligibility upon completion of that process,” he stated.