Tribal Gaming Organizations Tell CFTC That Sports-Event Contracts Are Illegal Gaming, Demand Formal Consultation After Roundtable

On September 15, 2026, the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and the Indian Gaming Association (IGA), joined by other regional tribal organizations, said in a joint statement that sports-event contracts offered by prediction market platforms are, in their view, illegal gaming that cannot evade federal, state, and tribal gaming laws by being labeled financial products. The statement followed what the organizations described as a private, invitation-only roundtable convened by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on prediction markets the previous day.

The roundtable’s format, participants, and content are described here only as characterized in the tribal organizations’ release.

Three principles for the CFTC

The organizations set out three principles they said must guide the agency’s work. First, they argued that a sports wager does not become a lawful financial instrument by being called an “event contract,” pointing to the CFTC’s own regulation prohibiting event contracts involving gaming or activity unlawful under state or federal law. IGA has previously stated that sports-event contracts violate the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and the federal Wire Act — a position attributed to the organization, not an established legal conclusion.

Second, the groups said federal decisions affecting tribal gaming and sovereignty require meaningful government-to-government consultation with tribal nations, and that meeting with tribal organizations “does not constitute consultation with Tribal Nations.” Third, they said the roundtable must mark the beginning of deeper engagement, with continued dialogue and formal consultation as the CFTC considers any rulemaking, guidance, enforcement policy, or other action involving sports-event contracts and gaming.

Statements from tribal leaders and a state attorney general

NCAI President Mark Macarro said in the release that the roundtable “fell well short” of the consultation standard. “A roundtable is not consultation,” Macarro said, acknowledging what he described as the effort of the CFTC chairman — identified in the release as Chairman Selig — to convene the discussion. “What Tribal Nations require — and what federal law mandates — is government-to-government consultation, not a listening session.”

IGA Chairman David Z. Bean called the roundtable “a missed opportunity for constructive dialogue with Tribal Nations,” and said the CFTC “would not explain how sports betting became legal across the country simply because a prediction market calls it an event contract.” Bean said the agency “must enforce the law as written and work directly with Tribal Nations before moving forward with policies that could undermine IGRA and Tribal-state compacts.”

The release also quoted New Jersey Attorney General Jennifer Davenport, identified as not a participant in the roundtable, expressing support for the tribal position. “Prediction markets offer sports gambling without following our laws, expressly flouting the authority of States and Tribes alike,” Davenport said, according to the tribal organizations’ release, adding that New Jersey would stand with “Tribes and a bipartisan coalition of States in opposing the lawless conduct of prediction markets.”

The regulatory framework at issue

The dispute sits on top of a specific statutory and regulatory structure. Section 5c(c)(5)(C) of the Commodity Exchange Act, added by the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010, authorizes the CFTC to prohibit event contracts from being listed or cleared on registered entities if the contracts involve enumerated activities — including gaming and activity unlawful under federal or state law — and the commission determines they are contrary to the public interest, according to the CFTC’s June 10, 2024 proposed rule on event contracts.

Implementing that authority, CFTC Regulation 40.11(a)(1) currently provides that a registered entity shall not list for trading or accept for clearing an agreement, contract, transaction, or swap based on an excluded commodity that “involves, relates to, or references terrorism, assassination, war, gaming, or an activity that is unlawful under any State or Federal law.” Regulation 40.11(c) separately authorizes a 90-day review of a submitted contract that may involve an enumerated activity, during which the commission must request suspension of listing or trading and must ultimately issue an order approving or disapproving the contract.

Prior reviews and a pending proposal

The 2024 Federal Register document recounts the commission’s prior use of that authority. In 2012, the CFTC issued an order prohibiting Nadex political event contracts, finding they involved gaming and were contrary to the public interest. In 2023, the commission issued an order prohibiting KalshiEX LLC’s congressional-control contracts on similar grounds; as of the June 2024 document, that order was under judicial review in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and its current status is not established by the available evidence. In 2020, the commission commenced a 90-day review of ErisX contracts based on NFL moneyline, point spread, and total-points markets; ErisX withdrew the contracts before a final determination.

The 2024 proposal itself would have defined “gaming” as the staking or risking of something of value on the outcome of a contest of others, a game of skill or chance, the performance of competitors, or other occurrences connected to contests or games — expressly including games in which athletes compete — and would have categorically determined that event contracts involving each enumerated activity, including gaming, are contrary to the public interest. Comments on the proposal were due July 9, 2024. Whether the proposal was ever adopted, amended, or withdrawn is not established by the opened evidence.

NCAI and IGA said they will continue engaging with the CFTC and other federal officials to seek enforcement of existing gaming laws, respect for tribal sovereignty, and full consultation on federal actions affecting Indian gaming.