California’s Big Lagoon Rancheria has publicly opposed Assembly Bill 831, which seeks to ban online sweepstakes gaming, joining the Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation in dissent. As the Senate Appropriations Committee prepares for a crucial vote on Aug. 29, 2025, the tribal divide signals growing tensions over the legislation’s impact on sovereignty and digital revenue streams. Despite initial broad tribal support for the bill, the mounting opposition underscores a deepening rift among tribes in California.
The Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation has since strengthened its position by partnering with sweepstakes operator VGW. Despite early signs of widespread tribal support for the bill, the developments highlight a lack of consensus around the anti-sweepstakes legislation.
AB 831 stuck in ‘suspense’ as clock ticks in Sacramento
Assembly Bill 831, authored by Assemblymember Avelino Valencia, is currently held in the Senate Appropriations Committee’s “suspense file” after unanimous approvals from earlier Senate committees. This placement allows for vital fiscal analysis before the bill can proceed to a full Senate vote, with a decision expected by the end of August.
If taken off suspense, the bill would advance to the Senate floor —and, due to its significant amendments, likely return to the Assembly for reconsideration.
Small Humboldt Tribe draws line against AB 831 ban
Big Lagoon Rancheria is a small, federally recognized tribe made up of Yurok and Tolowa Indians. The tribe is based in Humboldt County, California. According to the 2010 census, its reservation had only 17 residents, and the tribe does not operate a casino.
On Aug. 25, Tribal Chair Virgil Moorehead sent a letter to the California Senate Appropriations Committee urging lawmakers to halt AB 831. In the letter, Moorehead called for formal tribal consultation before moving forward.
He argued that the bill threatens tribal sovereignty by extending state jurisdiction into Indian Country and could criminalize digital business opportunities that some smaller or non-gaming tribes rely on. “AB 831 will eliminate digital business opportunities … without offsetting benefits,” Moorehead wrote. He called for a pause and more dialogue to explore fair alternatives.
Inside California’s sweeping anti-sweepstakes casino bill
California’s AB 831 would make it unlawful for any person or entity to operate, conduct, offer or promote an online sweepstakes casino game as defined in the bill. It would also prohibit financial institutions, payment processors, geolocation providers, gaming content suppliers, platform providers and media affiliates from knowingly supporting, directly or indirectly, such games in California.
The bill was substantially rewritten after passing the Assembly. Originally a narrower update to compact review rules, AB 831 has since evolved into a broad ban affecting both operators and third-party service providers. The amended version passed unanimously through two Senate committees before being placed in the Appropriations Committee’s suspense file for fiscal review.
If the committee removes the bill from suspense, it will advance to the full Senate. Because of the significant amendments, it would also need to return to the Assembly for reconsideration. The Legislature is set to adjourn Oct. 15, leaving lawmakers little time to act.
Supporters tout integrity, opponents warn of overreach
AB 831 has strong support from major tribal gaming interests. It is co-sponsored by the Yuhaaviatam of San Manuel Nation and the California Nations Indian Gaming Association. Supporters argue that the bill preserves the integrity of voter-approved gaming structures and enhances consumer protections.
Critics, however, say the bill is overly broad and rushed. The Social and Promotional Games Association (SPGA), along with groups such as the ACLU, has warned that the bill’s vague language could restrict lawful marketing and promotional activities. In the SPGA’s Opposition Letter to CA Assemblymember Valencia on AB 831, key lines include criticisms such as the bill being “too vague, too rushed, and too risky,” and describe the situation as “short-sighted and irresponsible.”
The debate underscores growing tension between large gaming tribes and smaller or non-gaming tribes.
Kletsel Dehe becomes first Tribe to defy anti-sweepstakes push
Last week, the Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation of Cortina Rancheria became the first tribe to publicly oppose AB 831, testifying before the Senate Appropriations Committee. The tribe also announced a partnership with VGW.
Eric Wright, CEO of the tribe’s economic development arm, said the bill lacks broad tribal consensus and favors large casino tribes with geographic advantages. He warned that smaller, rural tribes without casinos risk being shut out of emerging opportunities in digital commerce.
“Large, well-established gaming tribes already benefit from geography. It is self-serving for them to advocate for policies that restrict emerging digital opportunities for others,” Wright said, according to a news post by PlayCA. The Kletsel Dehe Wintun Nation has about 270 members.
From Montana to NJ, states crack down on sweepstakes casinos
Sweepstakes gaming is facing increasing legal pressure nationwide. Montana banned online sweepstakes casinos in May 2025, followed by Connecticut in June and New Jersey earlier this summer. Nevada has empowered regulators to target out-of-state operators. Meanwhile, California and New York are weighing similar bans.
California’s debate is unique, with some tribes — including Big Lagoon and Kletsel Dehe Wintun — viewing digital sweepstakes as vital to future revenue. Their opposition highlights the growing divide between large casino-operating tribes and smaller, digitally focused ones.
High stakes, high tension: Tribes split on digital gaming future
With the legislative session wrapping up by Sept. 12, 2025, and the vote looming on Aug. 29, lawmakers are racing against time. The outcome could either enforce a sweeping ban on digital sweepstakes platforms—or stall the bill and grant operators a reprieve.
The growing resistance from smaller or non-gaming tribes like Big Lagoon Rancheria and Kletsel Dehe highlights the uneven consequences of AB 831 and reinforces the urgency for thoughtful, inclusive dialogue that protects tribal sovereignty without sidelining emerging digital opportunities.