Published on: October 13, 2025, at 04:15h.
Updated on: October 13, 2025, at 04:15h.
- Judge finds that federal regulations supersede California’s Tribal Justice Act.
- Tribes fail in their attempt to oppose cardrooms’ “California games.”
- This ruling reignites a longstanding gambling dispute between tribal entities and cardrooms.
A judge in California’s Superior Court has thwarted a legal challenge by tribal operators aimed at diminishing the influence of the state’s cardroom industry.
On Friday, Judge Lauri Damrell dismissed the tribal case, closing any potential avenues for challenging the cardrooms.
Tribal operators have consistently expressed concerns that certain offerings from cardrooms are unlawful and infringe on tribal rights to house-banked casino games. However, they have faced legal restrictions as state courts lack jurisdiction in cases involving tribal rights or activities governed by federal law.
Legal Avenue Closed
Last year, California Governor Gavin Newsom enacted the Tribal Nations Access to Justice Act (TNAJA), providing tribes a limited avenue to pursue legal action in state courts.
While the law prohibited monetary claims, it permitted tribes to seek judicial clarification on the legality of contested games.
Judge Damrell has now firmly closed that avenue, ruling that federal law prevails over TNAJA. This decision was anticipated following her preliminary ruling issued in August.
Don’t Bank on It
Tribal frustration centers on the proliferation of “California games”—modified casino favorites like blackjack and pai gow poker designed to bypass the state’s prohibition on house-banked games outside of tribal venues.
Rather than having the house play against participants, cardrooms charge a small fee from each hand and players take turns being the dealer—similar to poker dynamics.
In their lawsuit, the tribes contended that California games do not genuinely implement a true rotation of the bank position, instead merely offering the opportunity for rotation.
This setup allows a single player to remain as the banker indefinitely if no other players accept the turn, creating a scenario akin to Nevada and New Jersey-style banked games, as stated in their complaint.
To fulfill the dealer role, cardrooms often hire licensed firms that provide third-party proposition players (TPPPs), as many customers are reluctant to take on the banker role. Tribal casinos assert that these TPPPs effectively act as the house in the game when cardrooms do not rotate the banker as required by state law.
Relief for Cardrooms
Kyle Kirkland, President of the California Gaming Association (CGA), representing cardrooms, welcomed the ruling in a statement to Casino.org on Friday.
“We are pleased with today’s ruling. Our member cardrooms will continue to contribute to job creation, essential public services, and local economies throughout California while maintaining high standards of integrity and compliance,” Kirkland remarked.
Conversely, James Siva, chairperson of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA), insisted that commercial cardrooms continue to violate the law by offering California games.
“Our goal has always been a clear judicial ruling on the legality of these practices under state law,” he stated. “This isn’t an unreasonable request, and tribes deserve their day in court.”