|
MAJOR TOPICS
Operators like Kalshi, Crypto․com, and Robinhood are conducting what is essentially unlicensed and unregulated nationwide mobile sports betting through their offering of sports event contracts, which we assert infringes on Tribal sovereignty and Tribal government revenue protected under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
CURRENT STATUS
Nationally, there are multiple cases and appeals currently pending against Kalshi, Crypto․com, Robinhood, and other operators that challenge the use of sports event contracts to disguise mobile sports betting. These cases have most often arisen when a state attempts to regulate one of these operators, and the operator sues the state to prevent that regulation. Federal courts have divided on whether to side with the operators or with the state regulators trying to enforce their gaming laws and regulations. This issue is likely to eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court. USET SPF has joined Tribal amicus briefs in two cases, for which we provided litigation alerts in August and June. This week, we joined an additional Tribal amicus brief in North American Derivatives Exchange, Inc. d/b/a Crypto․com v. Hendrick, No. 2:25-cv-00978 (D. Nev. filed June 3, 2025). We will be joining additional Tribal amicus briefs as these cases and appeals continue to arise, and we will provide alerts when there are major updates in any of these cases.
BACKGROUND
A sports event contract is a type of futures trading instrument
that is publicly traded on a prediction market regulated by the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and has an outcome-dependent payoff that is
usually based on whether or not a specific event occurs. Operators like Kalshi
offer their mobile sports event contracts nationally, including on Tribal
Nations’ Indian lands covered by IGRA. The operators argue that their sports
event contracts are not gaming; are governed by the Commodity Exchange Act
(CEA), which they argue preempts state law; and are subject to the exclusive
jurisdiction of the CFTC, not state regulators.
TRIBAL AMICUS BRIEFS
The Tribal amicus briefs in these cases argue that IGRA
extends to sports event contracts, and that ignoring IGRA in this context
raises serious concerns in violation of federal Indian law and policy,
including infringing on Tribal sovereignty and regulatory authority and
siphoning off critical Tribal government revenue.
USET SPF INTERESTS AND INVOLVEMENT
In supporting these Tribal amicus briefs, USET SPF joins dozens of
Tribal Nations and Tribal organizations, including the Indian Gaming
Association (IGA) and the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI). USET
SPF has an overarching interest in upholding Tribal sovereignty in all forms,
including the right to conduct economic development for the benefit of Tribal
communities. These cases have high stakes for the future of Tribal gaming as a
reliable source of Tribal government revenue, as negative outcomes could
greatly weaken IGRA, which for many Tribal Nations has become a key tool in the
exercise of Tribal sovereignty.
For more information, please contact Liz Malerba, USET SPF Director of Policy and Legislative Affairs, Katie Klass, USET SPF General Counsel, or Taylour Boboltz, USET SPF Staff Attorney.
|
