California’s long fight over who controls gambling in the state took another twist this month. A Sacramento judge dismissed a lawsuit from several Native American tribes who wanted to stop local card rooms from running casino-style games. For years, the tribes have said they alone should be allowed to offer blackjack and pai gow poker. Spending millions on protecting what is viewed as their exclusive rights to operate full-scale casinos, this ruling was a massive disappointment for tribal leaders.

The discussion of tribal versus alternative card rooms has come back, but now it’s during a time where more players are turning to online casino sites for California residents, essentially offshore alternatives. Since the state doesn’t allow traditional real-money gambling, these platforms offer a legal alternative and have caught the attention of tribal casinos. Despite this attention, online casinos work entirely different to tribal card rooms, as players don’t need to leave the house to play, which is what makes them untouchable in this new debate over tribal exclusivity.

Superior Court Judge Lauri Damrell decided that federal gambling law outweighs Senate Bill 549, a state law passed last year that briefly opened the door for tribes to sue card rooms. Before that law, tribes couldn’t file such cases because, as sovereign nations, they lacked standing in state courts. The judge’s ruling means those suits won’t move forward right now, leaving the issue as unresolved as ever. For many, it’s another chapter in California’s long and complicated gambling story.

Damrell wrote that while many stakeholders wanted a final answer to this issue, her hands were tied by federal limits. The case had drawn attention not only from casino operators but also from local governments that rely heavily on gaming tax revenue. The ruling was quickly celebrated by the card room industry, which called it a win for fairness and stability in the state’s gaming sector.

For tribal leaders, the decision stings. They argue that when voters gave tribes the right to offer Las Vegas-style gaming decades ago, that agreement was meant to be exclusive. Letting non-tribal card rooms run similar games, they say, violates both the spirit and letter of that deal. Beyond the legal arguments, the tribes emphasize what’s at stake: gambling revenue funds schools, healthcare, and infrastructure in communities that historically had few economic opportunities.

Card room representatives see it differently. Leading the California Gaming Association, Kyle Kirkland has praised this decision. He says the ruling protects local jobs and keeps money flowing into city budgets. Although the ruling stands, tribal leaders have vowed to appeal. The chair of the California Nations Indian Gaming Association, James Siva, called the ruling disappointing but not surprising.

Their lawsuit, filed January 2, the day SB 549 took effect, accused dozens of California card rooms of running illegal gambling operations. Card room owners responded that their games comply with state rules and have been reviewed by the attorney general. The larger debate isn’t over and we’ll likely see more rulings made in the future. In fact, lawmakers have already seen more measures put in place. Aimed at banning sweepstakes sites that are believed to threaten tribes’ gaming rights, Assembly Bill 831 was put into talks. This bill now awaits a decision from Governor Gavin Newsom.