Tribal Legislation Report
Tribal gaming legislation started off with a bang this year when Maine Governor Janet Mills enabled a bill to become law granting tribes exclusive online casino rights in her state. But several bills backed by tribes in other states are on shaky ground heading further into the legislative calendar.
Mills’ administration had offered opposition testimony during the legislative process of LD 1164, but she did not block it. It granted Maine’s four Wabanaki tribes access to the online casino market. The tribes already control online sports betting.
Mills said her ultimate decision was based on helping improve the lives of the state’s tribes. With a tax rate of 18 percent on online casino revenue, legislative estimates also suggest the state could bring in up to $100 million in taxes over the first decade.
The operators—likely Caesars and DraftKings similar to the sports betting partnerships—could launch later this year. But there is still doubt in the air. Churchill Downs, which operates a casino in the state, has sued Maine regulators, arguing the law violates equal protection laws. Also, the National Association Against iGaming will lead a people’s veto initiative seeking to overturn the law by public referendum.
In Wisconsin, a sports betting proposal granting state tribes exclusive access to online sports betting emerged last year. As of mid-February, lawmakers were still discussing the idea behind the scenes. Democratic Governor Tony Evers supports the plan, but Republican lawmakers prefer to include commercial entities, which have advocated in legislative hearings for direct access to the market.
In nearby Minnesota, lawmakers appeared to make serious progress over the past several sessions toward adopting a tribal-led online sports betting proposal. However, hurdles emerged each year, preventing final passage. The attempt was further derailed in 2025, and the issue did not advance beyond its initial committee.
In 2026, the Minnesota sports betting issue has not emerged as lawmakers deal with a variety of other subjects.
Oklahoma lawmakers continue to work toward some kind of deal intended to provide tribes with sports betting. However, a longstanding impasse with Governor Kevin Stitt remains. During Stitt’s final State of the State address in February, he did not directly mention sports betting but slammed the concept of tribal sovereignty.
“Many of us in this room have decried the DEI programs of the Biden administration, yet stand quietly by when some say an Indian should be subject to a different set of laws,” Stitt said. “We either believe in equal rights for all or we don’t, and it’s time to choose.”
The governor has vowed over multiple sessions to veto any tribal-exclusive sports betting bill. Multiple sports betting bills received House approval last year but have yet to see any Senate action.
Oklahoma lawmakers continue to work toward some kind of deal intended to provide tribes with sports betting. However, a longstanding impasse with Governor Kevin Stitt remains. During Stitt’s final State of the State address in February, he did not directly mention sports betting but slammed the concept of tribal sovereignty.
Oklahoma Senator Bill Coleman told iGaming Business there are ongoing conversations and the issue is “getting real close.”
Meanwhile, the Indian Gaming Association appears largely locked in on fighting the emergence of prediction markets.
Tribes are involved in multiple lawsuits against prediction market operators, primarily Kalshi. The companies argue that they can operate nationwide under the regulation of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The tribes counter that such operations violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
IGA Chairman David Bean, noting that gaming is the economic bloodline for more than 240 tribal governments, contends prediction markets violate state, federal and tribal laws. He called for Congress to crack down on the markets.
“We demand that the CFTC do its job, and short of that, we urge Congress to act by amending the CEA (Commodity Exchange Act) to reinforce the existing prohibition against gaming,” Bean said. “Tribes have fought for too long and worked too hard to build and preserve the integrity of our industry and the resources that enable tribal governments to provide for their communities.”
