California Tribal Casinos & Indian Gaming | 2019 News Archive

California tribes seek 2020 ballot measure for sports betting

November 19, 2019

A coalition of 18 California tribes led by the Pechanga Band of Luiseno Indians proposed a ballot initiative last week to legalize sports betting in California. Papers have been filed with the state attorney general seeking a signature drive to qualify as a ballot measure in the November 2020 election. Nearly one million signatures are needed from registered voters to qualify for the ballot.

If passed by voters next year, the state constitution would be amended to allow sports betting at California Indian casinos and state-licensed racetracks. Card clubs are excluded. Wagering would be allowed on professional and college sports, but not on high school sports or some amateur sports.

Mark Macarro, Pechanga Tribal Chairman, said in a statement:

"Californians should have the choice to participate in sports wagering at highly regulated, safe and experienced gaming locations. We are very proud to see tribes from across California come together for this effort, which represents an incremental but important step toward giving Californians the freedom to participate in this new activity in a responsible manner."

Under this measure the state would receive a 10% tax on gross revenues from all sports betting operations.

Three California Tribes will appeal US District Court decision

Calif Tribes Lose Lawsuit for Card Game Exclusivity

June 19, 2019

In January this year three California tribes filed a lawsuit in federal court against the State of California and Governor Newsom to stop state-licensed cardrooms from playing blackjack, baccarat and other house-banked games.

The tribes asserted these games were an illegal violation of the tribes' exclusive rights to these games as granted by their state-tribal gaming compacts, state laws and the California constitution.

Yesterday Judge John A. Mendez of the United States District Court dismissed the case stating the state-tribal compacts do not grant an exclusive right for these games. When the 1999 gaming compacts, which guaranteed exclusivity, were renegotiated in 2015-2016 the same guarantee was not extended.

The ruling resulted in this immediate press release today by the California Gaming Association

United States District Court's Order to Dismiss California Tribes' Lawsuit for Breach of the Tribal-State Compacts Against the State and Governor Newsom

NEWS PROVIDED BY California Gaming Association
Jun 19, 2019, 17:54 ET

SACRAMENTO, Calif., June 19, 2019 /PRNewswire/ -- Yesterday, the United States District Court dismissed a lawsuit filed by three California Tribes against the State of California and Governor Newsom. The suit sought to force the State to shut down lawful cardroom games like blackjack and baccarat claiming tribal exclusivity of them, but in its ruling, the Court ruled that the tribes' compacts did not give them the exclusive rights to these games in California. Previously, four California Court of Appeal decisions have ruled that these cardrooms may operate non banked versions of these games, and for decades, cardrooms have offered these games with specific approval of the Attorney General without harm to or complaint by the public

California Gaming Association President Kyle Kirkland issued the following statement:

"We are pleased that the Court dismissed this lawsuit by these California tribes against the State of California over alleged violations of their tribal gaming compacts. The Federal Court ruled that the compacts do not give the tribes exclusivity over gaming in California. This litigation was an attempt to eliminate competition from local cardrooms, threatening thousands of California families and dozens of communities statewide.

We will continue to oppose specious tribal attacks on our industry, employees and communities. Tens of thousands of Californians count on cardroom living wage jobs to support their families, and dozens of communities rely on the tax revenue we generate to support vital public services. We will not stand by quietly while wealthy tribes try to misuse court resources to hurt our employees, their families and our communities."

The tribes have claimed that the Court ruled on procedural grounds and did not address exclusivity. In fact, the Court ruled that the tribal compacts did not provide exclusivity to these games. In its ruling, the Court made clear that the tribes' interpretation of their compact rights was flawed. Here are key statements in the Court's order to dismiss (Case 2:19-cv-00025-JAM-AC):

• Plaintiffs (Tribes) argue the most-recently entered Compacts guarantee the same right of exclusivity that was bargained for in the 1999 agreements. The Court disagrees. The Compacts, although recognizing the right of exclusivity provided by the California Constitution, do not include any express terms regarding Defendants' obligation to preserve that right. In fact, the Compacts contemplate the abrogation of that right, providing the Tribes limited recourse in the event their rights of exclusivity lapse. (Page 8, Lines 12-20)

• Plaintiffs' (Tribes) claim requires a showing that the Compacts created an obligation by the State to adopt Plaintiffs' definition of "banking and percentage card games." Nothing in the Compacts suggest such an obligation. In fact, Plaintiffs' own complaint undermines the notion that the terms of the Compacts presupposed how Defendants would interpret and enforce state law. (Page 11, Lines 22-28)

• Plaintiffs' (Tribes) claim requires a showing that the Compacts created an obligation by the State to adopt Plaintiffs' (Tribes) definition of "banking and percentage card games." Nothing in the Compacts suggest such an obligation. (Page 11, Lines 22-25)

• Devoid of any indication that the Compacts created these obligations, Plaintiffs' (Tribes) allegations of bad faith fall short. (Page 12, Lines 8-9)

For more information about the California Gaming Association, go to www.calgaming.org.

MEDIA CONTACT: Anna Williamson
Mobile: (843) 408-7125

SOURCE California Gaming Association

California Tribes Sue State over Illegal Games in Cardrooms

January 4, 2019

Three California tribes have filed a lawsuit in federal court against the State of California for allowing some state-licensed cardrooms to illegally offer blackjack, baccarat and other house-banked games prohibited by law.

In a statement from Anthony Roberts, Yocha Dehe Tribal Chairman, he said "State law, the Constitution and our compacts are all very clear about our exclusive right to operate house-banked, casino-style card game".

The California Constitution prohibited all casino gambling until it was amended in 2000 following voter approval of Proposition 1A "Gambling on Tribal Lands Amendment." The amendment allows casino games at Indian casinos where players bet against the house rather than against each other. It requires the tribes have a compact with the state a pay the state a percentage of their revenues.

John Christman, Tribal Chairman of the Viejas Band, added, "Since 2012, we have sought resolution through the agencies and individuals responsible for enforcing these laws and preventing illegal gambling activity in California.Going to court is regrettably our last recourse, only because of the State's continued inaction against such blatant illegal activity. If California enforced its current laws, we would not have filed this lawsuit."

The three tribes that filled the lawsuit are the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, who owns the Cache Creek Casino in Northern California, the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians, who owns the Viejas Casino in San Diego County and the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, owners of the Sycuan Casino in San Diego County.