Tribes Fight Ruling Blocking Lawsuit Over California Cardrooms

California’s long-running battle over who is legally allowed to run certain casino-style games reignited at the end of last week, when tribal casinos decided to fight off a recent court ruling that threatens to shut down their lawsuit against non-tribal cardrooms.

Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lauri Damrell gave a tentative ruling to dismiss the case, saying the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), which regulates gambling on tribal lands, takes precedence.

The Act “Should Not Stretch That Far”

The tribes consider it to be an act of misinterpretation. Their complaint targets cardrooms operating blackjack, baccarat, and other “banked” games off tribal land, which they claim are their exclusive right under California law.

“[The act] has not stretched that far and should not stretch that far,” said tribal attorney Adam Lauridsen. He argued that IGRA does not apply to non-tribal gambling properties, but to tribal casinos. 

By invoking IGRA to shut down their case, he said, the court would be breaking new legal ground and ignoring the state’s own authority to regulate gambling away from reservations.

The tribes brought their claim under Gov. Gavin Newsom’s Senate Bill 549, known as the Tribal Nations Access to Justice Act. The law allows tribes to sue cardrooms in state court to determine whether a banked game violates California law. 

Banked games are those in which the house acts as the bank. Cardrooms sidestep that by using third-party proposition players as the banker, a practice tribes say is illegal.

Lauridsen pointed out that the Legislature clearly granted tribes this right through SB 549, and that it should not, therefore, be overridden by federal law. 

“We don’t think any of this should be preempted because it’s non-tribal gaming off Indian land,” he said.

“They Can’t Have It Both Ways” 

Attorney Ben Horwich, who speaks out for the cardrooms, argued that the tribes are trying to go around the framework Congress designed through IGRA, which enables disputes to find their resolutions through tribal-state compacts. 

“They can’t have it both ways,” Horwich said. “That is why [the regulatory act] exists.” He argued that the tribes’ real goal is to eliminate competition.

Judge Damrell’s tentative ruling sided with the cardrooms, saying SB 549 essentially grants tribes a contractual remedy that could have been negotiated in a compact but wasn’t. 

IGRA, she noted, is “extremely comprehensive,” giving states no role beyond the compacting process.If Damrell, who has been a judge for the Superior Court of California since 2018, decides to change her stance, she will have to issue a revised ruling before the October 10 hearing.