The Briefing | Prediction markets pose dangers past misplaced income

Prediction markets stay probably the most intently watched points in Indian gaming as tribes problem federally regulated sports activities occasion contracts in courtroom and warn they threaten tribal gaming exclusivity.

Kevin Washburn (Chickasaw), a legislation professor who served as assistant secretary for Indian Affairs below President Barack Obama and former common counsel for the National Indian Gaming Commision, says the business’s file gaming revenues shouldn’t be interpreted as proof that prediction markets have had little impact.

In a dialog with Tribal Business News, Washburn mentioned why the timing of the most recent NICG income report could not seize the consequences of prediction markets, the broader dangers he believes prediction markets pose to tribal gaming, and the authorized questions he believes are headed to the U.S. Supreme Court. Here are 4 key takeaways from the interview.

Record gaming income doesn’t but reply the prediction market query

Washburn argues the most recent NIGC income report displays a interval earlier than prediction markets grew to become a significant aggressive power, making it a poor measure of their present influence.

He famous that the NIGC report relies on tribal fiscal years ending in 2025, which means many tribes’ reported revenues embody substantial parts of 2024 — earlier than prediction markets expanded considerably.

“What I’m worried about with this data is that it might disguise the impact a little bit,” he stated.

Washburn stated the figures are “very backward‑looking” and cautioned policymakers in opposition to concluding prediction markets have had little impact just because tribal gaming revenues reached a file degree.

The greatest menace could prolong past misplaced income

While Washburn expects prediction markets to scale back tribal gaming income, he believes the higher long-term danger is injury to public confidence in legalized playing.

He pointed to a rising variety of gambling-related controversies involving prediction markets and sports activities betting, arguing that extremely publicized scandals might set off a broader public backlash in opposition to playing — not simply prediction markets.

“I think there’s an existential threat that’s even greater than whatever the incremental impact on revenues is,” Washburn stated. “The public could throw the gambling baby out with the prediction market bathwater because it’s the prediction markets causing these scandals or allowing them.”

Washburn stated public opinion has shifted in opposition to playing in earlier eras after repeated scandals and warned that tribal casinos, business casinos and state lotteries might all be affected if prediction markets erode confidence in regulated gaming.

Tribal issues prolong past competitors to tribal sovereignty

Washburn stated the dispute shouldn’t be solely about dropping clients but additionally about defending tribal regulatory authority.

He famous that tribes concerned within the New Mexico litigation have offered proof that individuals have been accessing prediction markets from their telephones whereas inside tribal casinos.

He stated prediction markets should not ring‑fenced and function inside areas ruled by unique tribal jurisdiction. He warned that this exercise violates federal Indian gaming guidelines and encroaches straight on tribal sovereignty.

“They’re doing something that’s subject to exclusive tribal jurisdiction,” he stated. That might grow to be more and more vital as litigation develops.

The courts — not regulators — will doubtless determine the problem.

Washburn expects the authorized battle over prediction markets to proceed by way of a number of federal appeals courts earlier than finally reaching the U.S. Supreme Court.

He anticipates completely different federal circuits will attain completely different conclusions, creating the kind of circuit break up that always prompts Supreme Court overview.

“It certainly will go to the Supreme Court because there will be circuit splits,” Washburn stated. “These prediction markets are trampling all over tribal sovereignty rights, but they’re also trampling all over the rights of states.”

Washburn additionally distinguished tribal lawsuits from challenges introduced by states, noting that tribes function below the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which particularly governs gaming on Indian lands and presents completely different authorized questions than state-based challenges.

About The Author

Staff Writer

Chez Oxendine (Lumbee-Cheraw) is a workers author for Tribal Business News. Based in Oklahoma, he focuses on broadband, Indigenous entrepreneurs, and federal coverage. His journalism has been featured in Native News Online, Fort Gibson Times, Muskogee Phoenix, Baconian Magazine, and Oklahoma Magazine, amongst others.

Other Articles by this creator