The Ninth Circuit ruled 3-0 in favor of the Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians on Wednesday, reversing a lower court’s denial of a preliminary injunction concerning Kalshi’s sports-event contracts on the tribes’ California lands. The case returns to the district court for further proceedings rather than ending in a final judgment, according to CDC Gaming.
The tribes sued Kalshi and Robinhood in 2025, arguing that sports prediction markets infringed their exclusive sovereign right to regulate gaming on their reservations. The Ninth Circuit panel found that Kalshi’s sports-event contracts constitute gaming under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and concluded that the tribes were likely to succeed on claims that Kalshi’s products on tribal lands violated IGRA and the tribes’ gaming ordinances.
Both tribes operate casinos under tribal-state gaming compacts with California, agreements that grant them exclusive rights to offer gaming within their territory. The appellate panel sent the case back to the district court, which must now weigh the remaining factors required to grant a preliminary injunction.
How the Lower Court Got Here
The district court had previously denied the tribes’ injunction request, accepting Kalshi’s position that its sports-event contracts function as federally regulated derivatives under the Commodity Exchange Act rather than as gambling products. That court also rejected the tribes’ Lanham Act claim, treating Kalshi’s advertising as a nonactionable opinion about the legality of its own products rather than a false or misleading statement.
The Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians, originally part of the lawsuit, withdrew from the proceedings last August. That same month, the Ninth Circuit issued a separate ruling finding Kalshi subject to oversight by the Nevada Gaming Control Board.
Kalshi’s Rejected Argument
Kalshi’s defense rested on the claim that its contracts are federally regulated derivatives under the CEA and therefore fall outside tribal and state gaming law. The district court had accepted that framing when it denied the injunction.
Judge Margaret McKeown’s opinion for the panel rejected the argument that the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act displaces IGRA, concluding that the federal gambling statute does not cover event contracts. The panel’s reasoning centered on the similarity between Kalshi’s contracts, which the company has called sports betting, and traditional sports wagers.
Reaction and What Comes Next
Scott Crowell, a tribal gaming attorney with Crowell Law Office Tribal Advocacy Group, described the ruling as a significant decision for tribes during the Indian Gaming Association’s New Normal webinar Wednesday. Gaming attorney Daniel Wallach told CDC Gaming that the decision provides a roadmap for other tribes across California and the country to challenge Kalshi’s business model. He said it could lead to more lawsuits and could result in Kalshi geofencing tribal reservations from its product.
The district court must now evaluate the remaining preliminary-injunction factors before any injunction takes effect. As of late Wednesday, Kalshi was considering whether to appeal the ruling.
The post Tribes Win Appeal, Sending Kalshi Case Back to Lower Court appeared first on ReadWrite.
