Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi, Inc.

Tribes’ injunction denied; on appeal (9th Cir.)9th Cir.Tribe v. Platform

Last updated August 16, 2026. Snapshot — not legal advice.

Overview

Three California tribes, led by the Blue Lake Rancheria, sought to block Kalshi under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, arguing its sports contracts amount to unauthorized gaming on tribal lands. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley (N.D. Cal.) denied their preliminary injunction (November 2025), and the Ninth Circuit heard oral argument (August 2026) — a panel that reportedly pressed Kalshi on why its sports contracts should be treated differently from betting when accessed from tribal land. The platform continues to operate pending a decision; the appeal is pending. California itself has no legal sports betting, so this fight is tribal rather than state-enforcement.

Timeline

Mid-2025

Three California tribes sue Kalshi under IGRA in the Northern District of California (3:25-cv-06162).

November 2025

Judge Corley denies the tribes a preliminary injunction; the tribes appeal to the Ninth Circuit (No. 25-7504).

July 2026

Ninth Circuit hears oral argument on the tribes’ appeal.

What's next: Ninth Circuit decision pending; no ruling from the bench.

Parties

Plaintiffs

  • Blue Lake Rancheria
  • Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
  • Picayune Rancheria of the Chukchansi Indians

Defendants

  • Kalshi, Inc.
This page is informational, not legal advice. Nearly every entry in this tracker is a preliminary ruling under appeal. Always verify a platform's current, location-specific eligibility directly with the venue before relying on this page.