by David Z. Bean
Indian Country has sounded the alarm about the existential threat posed by prediction market platforms offering transactions relating to sports gambling for nearly two years now. We have consistently argued that these contracts directly violate tribal sovereignty, the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), and hundreds of tribal-state gaming compacts.
On September 16, 2026, by a 3-0 vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed. The court ruled that the Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians deserved a preliminary injunction because they would likely prevail in their claim that prediction markets’ sports-related contracts violated IGRA and the tribes’ own gaming ordinances. The court reasoned that:
“[T]he challenged sports event contracts constitute ‘class III gaming activities [under IGRA]….Our conclusion is reinforced by the Department of the Interior’s compact review, which defines gaming activity as ‘the conduct of class III gaming involving the three required elements of chance, consideration, and prize or reward.’”
The court added that “Kalshi’s products are also ‘located on Indian lands’ when a user enters into the event contract from tribal territory,” which is a clear violation of IGRA and its mandate that tribal governments have exclusive authority to regulate gaming on their lands.
The court also rejected the prediction markets’ claim that that tribal gaming compacts and procedures bind only the parties who signed them, which would prevent tribes from bringing a suit to stop outside operators who are not parties to their compact or procedures. In this case, the tribes’ secretarial procedures require that gaming on their lands be tribally owned and conducted in accordance with tribal gaming ordinances, and those ordinances prohibit any gaming the tribe has not authorized. Because Kalshi holds no such authorization, its sports contracts offered on tribal lands fall outside the legal framework the tribes have established.
The case, titled Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi, Inc., builds on the Ninth Circuit’s August 28th decision in KalshiEX, LLC v. Assad, which held that sports event contracts are gambling subject to the State of Nevada’s gambling laws.
These are important legal conclusions, but the broader principle is equally important. For decades, tribes have responsibly grown highly regulated gaming operations that serve as the economic anchors of their communities. Tribal-state compacts, tribal gaming ordinances, and tribal gaming
regulations are not technical obstacles to be worked around. They are part of the legal framework established by IGRA and relied upon by tribal governments to protect our communities, our economies and the integrity of Indian gaming.
The Indian Gaming Association (IGA) has consistently maintained that sports wagering does not become something fundamentally different simply because it is labeled an “event contract” or misleadingly disguised as a financial instrument.
Despite the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s and the prediction markets’ claims of innovation, they have invented nothing. They offer products that mirror online sports gambling. The Ninth Circuit’s decision aligned with our message in stating that “Kalshi may reshuffle the cards, but it cannot change the hand: Its sports event contracts are Class III gaming.”
Indian gaming was not built overnight. Tribal nations spent generations defending the right of self-government and decades building a regulated industry that funds tribal governmental services, creates more than 680,000 jobs for American families, supports surrounding communities and provides economic opportunity throughout Indian Country.
While the Ninth Circuit’s decision does not end the legal battle against prediction markets, this decision is a meaningful victory for tribal sovereignty and the protection of these gains.
IGA was proud to participate in this appeal as amicus curiae alongside the National Congress of American Indians, the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, other regional tribal gaming associations, tribal organizations and federally recognized tribal governments.
We also recognize the leadership and determination of the tribal nations that brought this challenge. Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch carried the appeal forward, while Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians joined them in bringing the original action. Their willingness to defend their sovereign rights helped bring an issue of national importance for Indian Country before the federal courts.
We commend the tribal nations that brought this case forward and every tribal leader, regulator, organization and advocate who has continued to raise their voice to educate policymakers and sound the alarms. This decision demonstrates why that persistence is so important.
IGA will never waver from our mission of defending tribal sovereignty and the right of each tribal government to exclusively regulate Indian gaming on their lands, governed by their laws and tribal gaming ordinances.
David Z. Bean is Chairman of the Indian Gaming Association. He can be reached by calling (202) 546-7711 or visit www.indiangaming.org.
