Kalshi suffers a judicial setback against the tribes: the Indian Gaming Association celebrates a "victory for tribal sovereignty"
In a statement, the Indian Gaming Association highlights the decision of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the litigation against Kalshi for his contracts on sporting events offered in tribal territories of the United States.
The Indian Gaming Association (IGA) has welcomed the decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case of Blue Lake Rancheria et al. v. Kalshi, Inc. et al., a dispute that brings the debate over sports prediction markets and their fit into gambling regulation back to the forefront.
The court has reversed a district court's November 2025 decision that had denied tribes a preliminary injunction. The litigation revolves around whether contracts on sporting events offered to individuals located on tribal lands are subject to the requirements of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) applicable to Class III gambling.
Indian Gaming Association President David Z. Bean called the resolution a major victory for tribal sovereignty and for the implementation of IGRA.
The association's position is especially relevant to the debate surrounding Kalshi and other prediction market platforms. According to Bean, a sports bet doesn't stop being a sports bet simply because a company calls it an "event contract" and markets it through a federally regulated market.
The IGA argues that when such operations take place on Indian lands, specific federal legislation on tribal gambling should come into play.
Bean argues that the framework established by IGRA cannot be circumvented by technology, different terminology, or a federal license tied to commodity markets.
The association has expressly congratulated Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians, the two tribal nations that have defended their rights in this proceeding.
For the IGA, the case establishes an important legal line: companies cannot use an application to offer gambling in tribal territory outside the laws and agreements that regulate this activity there.
The association goes even further than this particular litigation. It says it has long argued that prediction market platforms should not be able to use the Commodity Exchange Act or CFTC oversight as an avenue to circumvent IGRA, tribal laws, tribal-state gaming agreements, or the powers of tribal regulators.
The IGA itself stresses that the conflict transcends a specific company or product.
The pronouncement comes amid the growing regulatory and judicial debate in the United States over sports-related prediction markets and how far federally registered platforms can go when their products work, critics argue, in a way equivalent to sports betting.
The Indian Gaming Association assures that it will continue to analyze the consequences of the decision for tribal nations and for the Native American gaming industry, in addition to maintaining its dialogue with Congress and federal regulators.
