A tentative ruling by Sacramento County Superior Court Judge Lauri Damrell in August dealt a setback to several California tribes that have sued the state’s cardrooms over “banked” games. The judge said the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act preempts the state law claims, even though the cardrooms operate off reservation lands. For North County, the stakes are close to home, with Ocean’s 11 in Oceanside among the cardrooms that benefit from the ruling.
Banked games such as blackjack and baccarat are at the heart of the case. Tribal compacts give California’s Native American casinos exclusivity over these games, where players compete against the house. Cardrooms, however, have long avoided the exclusivity barrier by relying on Third-Party Proposition Player Services, known as TPPPS, to act as dealers. That workaround has fueled years of disputes. As the legal battle unfolds over who holds the rights to blackjack and other banked games, players hardly lack options – the best casino apps now make it possible to spin the reels on a lunch break or play a quick hand of blackjack from the couch (source: casinoapps.com). The clash in California courts, however, highlights how contested these games remain outside the digital arena.
Tribes argue the tentative dismissal misapplies federal law. Their attorney, Adam Lauridsen, told the court that IGRA regulates gaming on tribal land, not in commercial cardrooms, and warned that stretching its reach would break new legal ground. Attorneys representing the cardrooms countered that tribes want to use federal protections to defend themselves while also pursuing state remedies against competitors. In their view, IGRA was created precisely to define the boundary.
The dispute has been running for years. Tribes first went to court in 2016, and cardrooms later struck back by suing over a sports betting ballot measure in 2022. Senate Bill 549, signed in 2024, gave tribes access to the Superior Court for these challenges. That legislative history underscores how political and financial the fight has become, with the climate characterized by intense lobbying of California’s government, like in the case of Hawaiian Gardens Casino, for example, which poured $9.1 million into lobbying in 2023. Its general counsel described it as a fight for survival as new laws threatened its long-standing games.
Regulators are now weighing in. The Bureau of Gambling Control has initiated formal rulemaking on new gambling regulations, covering both the rotation of the player-dealer position and the definition of blackjack-style games. Meanwhile, the state has launched formal rulemaking, with a 45-day public comment period ending in May 2025 and hearings scheduled the same week, showing that the conflict is being contested both in the courts and in the regulatory process.
The outcome matters for more than just casinos and cardrooms. Dozens of cities in California depend on cardroom tax revenue to fund police, fire, and road projects. Tens of thousands of jobs could be affected if the cardrooms are forced to strip down their offerings, while tribes view the exclusivity as a cornerstone of their economic security. The next hearing in the case is set for October, and until then, the future of blackjack in places like Oceanside remains uncertain.
