A San Francisco Superior Court judge granted a preliminary injunction Thursday to temporarily pause enforcement of new California regulations that would limit the ability of cardrooms to offer popular table games while a legal challenge proceeds.<\/p>\n
California Attorney General Rob Bonta\u00a0announced the new regulations<\/a> in early February after years of the state\u2019s gaming tribes complaining that the cardrooms\u2019 most popular games violate a law that grants them the exclusive right to offer banked games in which players bet against the house.<\/p>\n In early March, a group of cardrooms and\u00a0third-party proposition players<\/a>\u00a0(TPPPs)\u00a0filed two lawsuits<\/a>\u00a0challenging the new regulations issued by the California Department of Justice\u2019s Bureau of Gaming Control. A month later<\/a> they requested a preliminary injunction on the matters, which have been consolidated.<\/p>\n In granting the preliminary injunction, Judge Richard Darwin ruled that the bureau likely exceeded its authority in adopting the new regulations, finding clear and convincing evidence that the rules would irreparably harm cardrooms and the communities where they\u2019re based.<\/p>\n Projected losses<\/p>\n The regulations would limit the type of blackjack-style games cardrooms may offer and amend the operations of the TPPPs, which are special, licensed businesses that help cardrooms offer alternate versions of games that traditionally pit gamblers against the house, otherwise known as banked games.<\/p>\n California cardrooms and the cities that depend on them<\/a> for revenue say the regulations, which went into effect on April 1 but weren\u2019t set to be enforced until May 31, threaten to devastate them.<\/p>\n The cities of\u00a0Commerce<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Bell Gardens<\/a>, for example, declared fiscal emergencies and put a \u00bc-cent sales tax on the June 2026 ballot in response to the cardroom regulations. Those two cities are located in Los Angeles County and are home to\u00a0two of the state\u2019s three largest cardrooms<\/a>, Commerce Casino and Parkwest Bicycle Casino.<\/p>\n CGA President\u00a0Kyle Kirkland\u00a0is featured in a recent news clip warning that new regulations advanced by Attorney General Rob Bonta threaten California cardrooms and the communities that rely on them. Cardrooms support thousands of local jobs and generate critical revenue that\u2026<\/p>\n \u2014 CA Gaming Association (@CACardRooms) February 9, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n The state\u2019s own\u00a0economic assessment of the regulations<\/a>\u00a0found that they could result in the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue for cities as well as hundreds of jobs in California\u2019s cardroom\/TPPP sector.<\/p>\n \u201cToday\u2019s ruling validates what we have said all along: Attorney General Bonta and the Bureau of Gambling Control exceeded their authority by attempting to rewrite California gaming law,\u201d said Kyle Kirkland, president of the California Gaming Association, in a prepared statement. \u201cThese regulations were driven by pressure from powerful tribal gaming interests that have long sought to eliminate lawful competition from California\u2019s cardrooms.<\/p>\n \u201cCardrooms have lawfully operated the games targeted by these regulations for decades. Our games support thousands of middle-class jobs and generate critical revenue for communities across California.\u201d<\/p>\n Competing laws<\/p>\n State law explicitly bans cardrooms from offering banked games in\u00a0a throwback to the Gold Rush era<\/a>\u00a0when legislators were worried miners on the frontier would get hustled. While cardrooms evolved from saloons to glitzy casinos, they long were restricted to offering games like poker, where gamblers wager against each other.<\/p>\n In late 2007, however, an obscure state official named Bob Lytle\u00a0reinterpreted state law<\/a>, opening the door for cardrooms to offer variations of traditionally banked games. Today, thanks to both repeated approvals by state regulators and the TPPP that work symbiotically with cardrooms, alternate versions of banked games like blackjack and baccarat are offered off reservation in California cardrooms.<\/p>\n The tribes say this blatantly flies in the face of the will of the people, pointing to\u00a0Proposition 1A<\/a>, the ballot measure approved by voters in 2000, which authorized tribal gaming in California.<\/p>\n Proposition 1A gives Native American casinos the exclusive right in the Golden State to offer banked games like blackjack and baccarat, where gamblers wager against the house. Tribes tried to stop cardrooms from offering versions of banked games in court, but judges ruled that as sovereign nations they lacked standing to bring a lawsuit in state court.<\/p>\n Colma, California’s ‘Cemetery City’, could be one of the communities most adversely impacted by the state’s blackjack ban. Its city manager told the court he expects a 15% reduction in the municipal operating budget due to lost business at Lucky Chances, the local cardroom.<\/p>\n \u2014 Gaming America (@_GamingAmerica_) April 8, 2026<\/a><\/p>\n SB 549<\/a>, sponsored by former state Sen.\u00a0Josh Newman<\/a>\u00a0and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom in September 2024, sought to settle the matter once and for all by giving California\u2019s gaming tribes special standing in court to sue cardrooms over the games they offer.<\/p>\n The tribes filed suit as soon as they could in early 2025. But in October 2025, Sacramento Superior Court Judge\u00a0Lauri Damrell\u00a0dismissed the case, arguing that the federal\u00a0Indian Gaming Regulatory Act<\/a>\u00a0(IGRA) preempted the intention of the legislature and governor. At the time, she\u00a0acknowledged<\/a>\u00a0her ruling \u201cmay be wrong<\/a>,\u201d reflecting the maddening complexity of the legal issues involved.<\/p>\n From the moment Damrell announced her decision, the tribes were expected to appeal. That filing is still pending as lawyers\u00a0await the release of a briefing schedule<\/a>\u00a0by the Third District Court of Appeals in California.<\/p>\n Two regulations<\/p>\n While SB 549 was winding its way through the California Legislature, the state\u2019s attorney general, Bonta, was working on the two cardroom regulations<\/a>.<\/p>\n The bureau originally posted the proposed regulations in February 2025, withdrew them, then reposted them\u00a0on April 11, 2025<\/a>, starting the clock on the formal rulemaking process after a lengthy discussion when the proposals were in the draft phase two years prior. The bureau held hearings on the two proposed regulations in late May, when it also closed the window for receiving written comments on the plans.<\/p>\n One of the\u00a0new regulations<\/a> removes busting from blackjack-style games. In fact, that regulation bars cardrooms from offering any blackjack-style game where the target points equal 21. Under the new rules, cardroom games can\u2019t include the words \u201c21\u201d or \u201cblackjack\u201d in their names.<\/p>\n The other new regulation<\/a>, regarding TPPPs, calls for the role of the house or bank to be offered to every player at a quasi-banked table game before every hand and stipulates that \u201c[t]he player-dealer position shall rotate to at least two players other than the TPPPs every 40 minutes or the game shall end.\u201d<\/p>\n “On behalf of California\u2019s cardroom communities and Latino-owned businesses, I respectfully urge Bonta to withdraw the proposed regulations and work with the elected leaders, small business owners and local residents who want to preserve local gaming in their cities and towns.”\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/kvE1y8I6qN<\/a><\/p>\n \u2014 CA Gaming Association (@CACardRooms) November 10, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n TPPP workers wear badges to distinguish themselves from cardroom employees and park themselves at banked games within the cardrooms. Every hand, the dealer, a cardroom employee, offers players the opportunity to serve as the house.\u00a0 Most cardroom players don\u2019t have the funds cover that kind of action and decline. But the TPPP workers are funded by their employers and stationed at the banked games specifically for that task.<\/p>\n The TPPP workers volunteer to cover the action over and over again and the cardrooms are allowed to offer banked games they otherwise couldn\u2019t.<\/p>\n Under state law, TPPPs are supposed to be financially independent from the cardrooms in which they operate to avoid the cardrooms having a stake in wagering. Some cardroom owners, however, also have stakes in TPPPs<\/a>.<\/p>\n Tribal arguments<\/p>\n That\u2019s within the law, so long as the TPPP operates in a different cardroom, not the one with a common owner. But it\u2019s a point of contention for the tribes, which sought to intervene in the cardrooms\u2019 challenge of the regulations. That request was denied, but the tribes were allowed to file an amicus brief. <\/p>\n For the tribes, the signing of SB 549 represents a significant victory in their decades-long fight to protect their gaming rights. On the other hand, the cardroom industry now faces an existential threat.https:\/\/t.co\/NmOaQLDVXF<\/a><\/p>\n