Tribal Opposition Grows Against Prediction Markets Over Gaming Authority
Tribal Resistance Against Prediction Market Expansion
Several Native American tribes have come together to oppose the rise of prediction market platforms, emphasizing that these services infringe upon areas traditionally regulated by tribal gaming laws. This challenge adds a new layer to the ongoing conflicts over the regulation and control of betting activities across the United States, specifically highlighting the role of tribal entities within the gambling industry.
Growing Legal Challenges to Prediction Market Platforms
A wide coalition, comprising tribal groups and federally recognized tribes, has backed the Ho-Chunk Nation of Wisconsin in its legal battle against Kalshi, a prediction market operator, and its brokerage partner Robinhood. This support includes prominent organizations such as the Indian Gaming Association (IGA), the National Congress of American Indians, and sixteen tribes. They argue that gaming revenues are vital for sustaining many tribal communities, making this dispute essential to tribal sovereignty and their economic well-being.
Gaming income is critical for Tribes to develop infrastructure and provide vital services on reservations.
David Z. Bean, Chairman of IGA
Tribal leaders claim that platforms like Kalshi essentially offer sports betting under the guise of prediction markets. By enabling users throughout the country—including those on tribal lands—to trade contracts based on sports event outcomes, these platforms are potentially violating the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) and specific tribal-state agreements.
Similar cases have emerged beyond Wisconsin. Tribes in California have pursued related legal actions, while states such as Nevada have issued cease-and-desist orders to prediction market operators. These measures reflect mounting resistance from both tribes and state regulators, concerned that prediction markets challenge established and negotiated gaming systems that have been in place for decades.
Tribal Sovereignty and Legal Disputes at the Core
The core of the conflict lies in differing interpretations of the law. Tribes contend that the IGRA grants them exclusive rights to certain gambling activities within their territories. They argue that federally regulated event contracts circumvent tribal authority and sovereignty. Conversely, Kalshi argues that its activities fall under the jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and should be governed by commodities regulations rather than gaming laws.
The selection of the smallest financial regulator by prediction market companies to host their unregulated online gambling operations is no accident.
David Z. Bean, Chairman of IGA
Tribal representatives warn that allowing prediction market platforms to operate without sufficient oversight threatens decades of regulatory cooperation and diverts customers from legitimate tribal casinos. While some tribal leaders have proposed the possibility of launching their own prediction market platforms if federal agencies fail to act, most support a unified legal and political strategy as the most effective approach.
This emerging threat has fostered an unprecedented level of unity among tribes. The Indian Gaming Association has called upon tribal communities nationwide to collaborate on coordinated lawsuits, legislative lobbying, and calls for clearer federal regulatory guidance regarding prediction market operations. Their united message is that tribal gaming remains a stable economic foundation supporting communities, rather than an untested technological speculation.
