Indian Gaming Association Maintains Opposition to Revised CLARITY Act Over Tribal Gaming Protections

The Indian Gaming Association has stepped up its opposition to the revised Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, arguing that changes to the bill still fail to shield Tribal gaming authority and the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act from federal commodities rules. The dispute focuses on prediction markets operating under Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight, where platforms can offer event contracts linked to sports or casino-style outcomes that may bypass Tribal and state gaming frameworks.

Senator Cynthia Lummis issued updated legislative language addressing some industry concerns, including aspects of decentralized finance. However, the Association determined that these revisions left core issues unresolved, particularly the relationship between CFTC authority and existing gaming regulations.

Association Demands Explicit Non-Preemption Language

In a September 11 statement, Indian Gaming Association Chairman David Z. Bean said, “We want to make it absolutely clear that Indian Country is opposed to this version of the CLARITY Act. While we appreciate that Senator Lummis has acknowledged the legitimate concerns raised by Tribal Nations, the proposed changes do not address the fundamental concerns of Indian Country.”

Bean called for statutory language confirming that federal commodities law does not preempt Tribal gaming laws, state gaming laws or the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The group also wants designated contract markets barred from listing contracts tied to sports betting or casino games. Bean warned that enactment without these protections “would represent one of the greatest threats to Tribal sovereignty in a generation.”

Tribal gaming generated a record $43.9 billion in gross gaming revenue during fiscal year 2024, with more than 500 Tribal gaming establishments operating across 29 states. The Association has described the CLARITY Act as the largest expansion of CFTC authority since the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010.

Heinrich Amendment and the Path Ahead for Gaming Safeguards

Senator Martin Heinrich voted against advancing the bill on September 15 and plans to introduce an amendment containing an Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and Tribal-state compact savings clause. The proposal would also prevent CFTC-registered entities from listing prediction contracts resembling sports bets or casino-style gaming products.

“The legislation we voted on today undermines Tribal sovereignty and states’ police powers. And it directly threatens Tribes’ gaming revenues, which would mean less government services funding across Indian Country. That’s a lose-lose,” said Heinrich.

Heinrich previously led a July letter seeking Senate action on nationwide sports and event wagering through prediction markets, backed by the Indian Gaming Association and multiple Tribal governments. As reported by World Casino News, the standoff positions prediction markets as a persistent flashpoint in digital asset legislation, with Kalshi operating as a CFTC-regulated designated contract market and Polymarket pursuing a regulated U.S. entry.

The Indian Gaming Association has signaled it will sustain its opposition absent concrete statutory protections for frameworks in place since the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 and the 2018 Supreme Court decision opening regulated sports betting.

Reporting: World Casino News

Generated by SCCG’s automated editorial system from published source reporting. SCCG Management holds editorial responsibility.