A coalition of federally recognized tribes and Indian regulatory bodies has filed amicus briefs in two federal cases this month, arguing that allowing Kalshi and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to override state gaming laws would nullify tribal-state gaming compacts. The coalition contends that such actions would strip tribes of their authority to regulate gaming on their lands.
The legal argument
The briefs, submitted in separate cases, focus on the relationship between federal commodities law and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Under IGRA, tribes enter into compacts with states to govern casino-style gaming on reservations. The coalition argues that if Kalshi—a platform that offers event contracts on political outcomes—can operate without state approval, and if the CFTC can preempt state laws, those compacts become meaningless. The tribes say that would undermine a carefully balanced system that gives them exclusive regulatory power over their own gaming operations.
Why tribal sovereignty matters here
For tribes, gaming compacts are not just business deals. They are tools of self-governance, allowing tribal nations to set their own rules, enforce their own laws, and generate revenue for essential services. The coalition warns that letting a federal agency or a private company bypass state gaming laws would set a dangerous precedent. If the CFTC can override a state's decision to prohibit certain types of gambling, the same logic could be used to override a tribe's compact rights. The briefs stress that tribes have a direct stake in these cases because their regulatory authority hangs in the balance.
What's at stake in the two cases
One case involves Kalshi's attempt to offer election-related event contracts, which some states have banned as a form of gambling. The CFTC has taken a position that could preempt those state bans. The other case deals with broader questions about the CFTC's authority to regulate event contracts. The tribal coalition is not a party to either case, but its amicus briefs aim to inform the courts about the potential impact on tribal sovereignty. The briefs were filed jointly by several tribal nations and Indian gaming regulatory bodies, though the coalition did not name individual tribes in the public filings.
The cases are ongoing, and the courts have not yet set a date for oral arguments. The coalition's briefs will be part of the record as judges weigh whether to allow Kalshi's contracts and how far the CFTC's preemptive power extends.
