>From the Legislature's Ethics Committee consultant. 

Even if the tribes prevail, I would logically presume that candidates
themselves would still be required to report the contribution.  Also, there
has been speculation that using the same logic, California's contribution
limits might not apply to tribes. Again I would presume that, since under
California law a candidate can not accept a contribution in excess of the
limit, it would be a moot point as to whether the tribes can exceed the
limit. 

 -----Original Message-----

A new and sudden twist in the FPPC's attempts to get Indian tribes to file
campaign reports.  As previously mentioned, in the FPPC lawsuit with the
Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians (Sacramento Superior Court, Case
Number C043716), a Sacramento Superior Court judge ruled that the doctrine
of tribal/sovereign immunity does not apply to the tribe and it must file.
The tribe's attempt to get a writ from the 3rd DCA to throw out the FPPC's
suit was rejected without comment or prejudice last week.  However, on
Friday, in an FPPC suit with another tribe before another Sacramento
Superior Court judge, that judge ruled that the tribe could invoke
tribal/sovererign immunity and did not have to file (FPPC v. Santa Rosa
Community of the Santa Rosa Rancheria (Sacramento Superior Court, Case
Number 02AS04544)).  The 3rd DCA will no doubt be asked to sort this out and
whatever it says will be appealed.