A new battle is bubbling up in California’s already complicated gaming landscape. Tribal gaming operators have had enough—and they’re heading to federal court to say so.
It’s not just about money. This is about sovereignty, territory, and what counts as legal wagering. Prediction markets, pushed by platforms like Kalshi and Robinhood, are now facing fierce resistance from tribes who see this as a line too far.
Legal Gloves Off as Tribes Target Robinhood and Kalshi
The lawsuit dropped last week didn’t pull any punches. Three California tribes—whose identities haven’t all been made public yet—are suing Robinhood and Kalshi over their prediction market products. These platforms allow users to buy and sell contracts based on the outcome of real-world events, like “Will the Yankees win tonight?” or “Will it rain in Los Angeles tomorrow?”
But tribal leaders say those contracts walk, talk, and quack like sports bets.
And in California? That’s a problem. Tribes have exclusive rights to run certain types of gaming under long-standing compacts. They argue these new prediction contracts are undercutting that hard-won control.
In court filings, the tribes said Robinhood and Kalshi are offering “disguised sports wagering” and circumventing the law by hiding behind federal commodity regulations.
The Role of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Here’s where it gets murky. Kalshi’s products have been approved by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), a federal body that regulates financial markets—not gambling. Kalshi insists their offerings aren’t gambling, but financial instruments. The CFTC has so far agreed, giving Kalshi the green light.
This federal backing has given these companies a shield, or at least a loophole, to operate in markets where sports betting would otherwise be banned or tightly controlled.
But tribes aren’t having it. They say the CFTC’s involvement doesn’t change the nature of the product. If people are betting on sports outcomes, it’s betting—full stop.
There’s one short sentence that keeps cropping up in tribal commentary: “This is an invasion.”
Indian Gaming Association Launches Campaign to Push Back
On the defensive? Not exactly. The Indian Gaming Association (IGA) is going full throttle to counter prediction markets with legal, educational, and lobbying campaigns. Their webinar this week, titled “The New Normal: Prediction Markets in Real Time – What Tribes Need to Know Now”, wasn’t just a briefing—it was a war cry.
The message? These new platforms are testing the edges of regulation, and tribes need to be ready to defend their rights. Hard.
In that session, speakers outlined several key concerns:
-
Erosion of sovereignty: Letting third parties operate gaming-like platforms on tribal lands without approval undermines tribal control.
-
Legal ambiguity: Federal regulation doesn’t override state and tribal law.
-
Economic threat: These markets could undercut revenue from tribal-run casinos and sportsbooks.
One tribal leader compared it to “a poker game where the dealer suddenly changes the rules mid-hand.”
So What Exactly Are Prediction Markets?
To the average Californian, prediction markets might seem like harmless fun or just another way to be “in the know.” But they’re not exactly new, and they’re definitely not without risk.
These platforms let users bet on anything from political elections to weather to sports results. Think of them like a digital betting slip wrapped in finance jargon.
Here’s a quick comparison to help clarify:
| Feature | Prediction Market (Kalshi) | Traditional Sportsbook |
|---|---|---|
| Regulatory Body | Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) | State Gaming Commissions |
| Permitted on Tribal Land | Disputed | Yes (through compacts) |
| Classification | Financial instrument | Gambling |
| Type of Contract | Event-based futures | Fixed odds bets |
| Primary User Intent | Speculation/profit | Wagering/entertainment |
At first glance, they’re different. But functionally? There’s a strong argument they overlap—and that’s where the tension explodes.
California Isn’t New to Gaming Drama
This isn’t the first legal tangle over betting in the Golden State. Just two years ago, voters rejected duelling propositions: one backed by tribes to allow in-person sports betting, and another pushed by commercial operators for online wagering. Both failed.
Tribes came out swinging after that, determined to defend their turf. And they haven’t let up since.
With sports betting revenue estimated at over $10 billion nationwide in 2023, California remains the biggest untapped market in the US. That kind of money gets attention. And tribal leaders don’t want to see new competitors swoop in with what they see as legal trickery.
One tribal spokesperson said, bluntly, “They want the gold without respecting the land.”
What’s Next? Expect a Long, Loud Fight
No one’s backing down. Not Robinhood. Not Kalshi. And certainly not the tribes.
Legal experts suggest this could drag on for months, maybe years. The lawsuit may go federal, but pressure is also building in state legislatures. Some are already exploring ways to clarify the definition of “sports betting” to include contracts like Kalshi’s.
And then there’s Congress. If the CFTC keeps allowing these platforms to operate with few restrictions, tribes could push for legislation to block prediction markets on sovereign lands altogether.
For now, it’s a standoff. But with court dates pending and political heat rising, something’s got to give.
