California’s sweepstakes casino fight is entering its most critical stage yet. Lawmakers have amended Assembly Bill 831 (AB 831) for a second time in the Senate, reshaping the proposal that would outlaw sweepstakes casinos statewide while carving out protections for retail promotions and clarifying enforcement standards.
Senate Changes Clarify Scope
The latest amendments make it explicit that AB 831 does not touch the California State Lottery, licensed gambling under the Gambling Control Act, or limited retail promotions like the McDonald’s Monopoly game or Starbucks rewards sweepstakes. Instead, the bill now states plainly:
“It is unlawful for any person or entity to operate, conduct, or offer an online sweepstakes game in this state.”
To address industry concerns, the Senate added language shielding ancillary providers unless they act “knowingly and willfully.” That means banks, geolocation companies, payment processors, and affiliates cannot be penalized if they inadvertently support a sweepstakes operator. Individual players are also excluded from liability, ensuring casual users will not be criminalized.
These clarifications come after months of debate over whether AB 831’s original text risked sweeping too broadly into everyday promotions or third-party services.
Growing Tribal Divide
The bill continues to split California’s tribal voices. Large and influential tribes like the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and members of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA) remain staunch supporters, arguing that sweepstakes casinos undermine the regulated tribal gaming framework that has stood for decades.
But opposition has grown louder among smaller tribes. The Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation of the Cortina Rancheria, which recently partnered with social casino operator VGW, has been outspoken against the measure. The Sherwood Valley Band of Pomo Indians and the Mechoopda Tribe have also raised objections, claiming the bill was advanced without proper consultation and cuts off a potential digital lifeline for rural tribes.
This tribal split highlights the stakes: some see AB 831 as a safeguard of exclusivity, while others view it as a threat to economic opportunity.
Industry and Cardroom Pushback
Publishers Clearing House, which is now owned by a social gaming company, has joined in opposing the bill. Meanwhile, the California Cities Gaming Authority and several municipalities that host cardrooms have criticized AB 831, saying lawmakers ignored their concerns and left cardrooms vulnerable.
VGW, operator of Chumba Casino, LuckyLand Slots, and Global Poker, has taken a more aggressive approach. The company recently mobilized its player base with direct outreach, warning that the ban would eliminate games enjoyed “safely and responsibly” by millions of Californians and urging regulation over prohibition.
What’s Next
AB 831 has cleared committees and undergone multiple rounds of revisions. It now sits before the full Senate, with lawmakers facing pressure from tribes, operators, cardrooms, and consumer groups on both sides.
With California joining a growing list of states moving against sweepstakes casinos, the outcome of AB 831 could set a national precedent. Whether the bill passes as written or stalls under opposition, the coming weeks will determine the future of sweepstakes gaming in the country’s largest state.
About the Author
