Summary:
- The Ho-Chunk Nation is seeking to revive part of its lawsuit against Kalshi through an amended complaint.
- The tribe argues Kalshi’s “50 States Legal” advertising misrepresents its ability to offer sports event contracts on tribal land.
- Similar legal challenges from tribes in California and New Mexico remain active in federal courts.
The Ho-Chunk Nation has strengthened its legal battle against prediction market platform Kalshi after it decided to file an amended complaint looking to revive claims related to the company’s advertising and ability to offer sports-related event contracts on tribal lands.
After May’s Green Light Decision
The filing, submitted in federal court in Wisconsin, follows a May ruling that allowed part of the tribe’s lawsuit to proceed under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA).
However, the court dismissed separate claims brought under the Lanham Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
At the center of the dispute is Kalshi’s position that its sports event contracts are regulated financial products rather than gambling. The company maintains that it falls under the oversight of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and can legally offer its products nationwide.
Ho-Chunk Nation Disagrees
Tribal leaders claims that that Kalshi’s contracts work as sports betting and should, therefore, not be offered on tribal land without tribal approval. The tribe entered into a gaming compact in 2024 but has not authorized online sports betting on its reservation.
A major point of contention is Kalshi’s marketing slogan that describes its products as “50 States Legal”
In his earlier ruling, U.S. District Judge William Conley found that the tribe had not shown the advertisements were knowingly false because no court or regulator had definitively rejected Kalshi’s legal position.
The amended complaint takes a different approach. Rather than framing the issue primarily as false advertising, the tribe now argues that the marketing itself violates IGRA because federal law clearly governs Class III gaming activity on tribal lands.
The filing also addresses Kalshi’s argument that tribal lands are distinct from states. Ho-Chunk attorneys acknowledged that tribes are not states but argued that tribal lands exist within state boundaries and remain subject to federal gaming protections.
The Wisconsin case is one of several legal challenges facing Kalshi from tribal governments.
Three California tribes continue to pursue an appeal after a federal judge declined to block Kalshi’s operations last year, while New Mexico’s Mescalero Apache Tribe has filed its own lawsuit claiming Congress never intended federal law to permit sports event contracts resembling sports betting.
About the Author
