U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley granted a preliminary injunction against Kalshi on 4 November 2026. The one-page order in Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi Inc., N.D. Cal. No. 3:25-cv-06162, bars Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX from offering sports event contracts on the plaintiff tribes’ Indian lands. It is limited to those lands. It does not ban Kalshi sports contracts elsewhere in California.
What the order covers
The injunction names contracts that “facially involve, relate to, or reference” baseball, tennis, pickleball, soccer, basketball, football, golf, chess, esports, hockey, motorsports, boxing, wrestling and Ultimate Fighting Championship events. The tribes must give Kalshi maps of their Indian-land boundaries by 13 November 2026. Within 21 days of the order, Kalshi must file a status report on the steps it has taken to comply. The chart above marks those two clocks from 4 November.
How the tribes got here
Blue Lake Rancheria and Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians sued under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. On 16 September 2026 the Ninth Circuit, in No. 25-7504, held they were likely to succeed: Kalshi’s sports event contracts are class III gaming when entered from tribal territory, and the Commodity Exchange Act’s “exclusive” jurisdiction does not displace IGRA on Indian lands. The panel remanded for the remaining injunction factors. Corley had denied a PI earlier; after the remand and a further status conference on 4 November, she granted one.
One more front in a crowded fight
The order does not resolve whether Kalshi sports contracts are lawful off tribal lands. Kalshi remains a CFTC-designated contract market and is fighting states on other tracks, from Arkansas’ consumer suit to Utah’s criminal case. Separately, the CFTC has told DCMs to drop domestic geoblocks within 30 days or explain why they cannot; we covered that impartial-access guidance. A tribal-lands injunction under IGRA sits beside those fights, not inside them.
Key facts
Court: N.D. Cal., Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley; Blue Lake Rancheria v. Kalshi Inc., No. 3:25-cv-06162; Doc. 106, filed 4 November 2026.
Plaintiffs: Blue Lake Rancheria; Chicken Ranch Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians.
Defendants enjoined: Kalshi Inc. and KalshiEX (sports contracts on the tribes’ Indian lands only).
Deadlines: tribal land maps by 13 November 2026; Kalshi compliance status report within 21 days of the order.
Prior ruling: Ninth Circuit No. 25-7504, filed 16 September 2026 (likely success on IGRA; Lanham Act claim affirmed as denied).
Sources: N.D. Cal. Doc. 106 PDF; Ninth Circuit opinion PDF.
Why it matters for GambleFi
Prediction markets and iGaming token (GambleFi) venues that mirror sportsbook products keep running into overlapping regimes: CFTC designation, state gambling law, and now tribal gaming exclusivity on Indian lands. A PI that treats sports event contracts as class III gaming on a reservation is a concrete limit even where a federal exchange licence exists. For how onchain casinos and event-contract venues differ, see the GambleFi FAQ or our SX Bet and Shuffle project pages. This is a report on a court order, not legal or betting advice.