Legal tracker / New Mexico tribes v. Kalshi
Case · as of Oct 15, 2026
New Mexico tribes v. Kalshi
Pending Pending
Four New Mexico tribes allege Kalshi's sports contracts are unauthorized class III gaming on their lands in violation of IGRA and their compacts, also citing UIGEA and Kalshi's 18+ age limit versus the compacts' 21+ rule. The Ninth Circuit's Blue Lake ruling is persuasive but not binding authority in this Tenth Circuit case. No rulings located; details from secondary sources.
Case record last checked against its sources on Sep 30, 2026.
| Case | Mescalero Apache Tribe, Pueblo of Isleta, Pueblo of Pojoaque and Pueblo of Sandia v. Kalshi (exact caption not verified) |
| Court | Federal district court in New Mexico (reported; not verified) |
| Filed | May 12, 2026 |
| Type | Tribal gaming |
| Companies | Kalshi |
| Other side | Mescalero Apache Tribe; Pueblos of Isleta, Pojoaque and Sandia |
| Last action | May 12, 2026: Complaint filed. |
History
Newest first.
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| May 12, 2026 | Complaint filed. |
Sources
New Mexico tribes v. Kalshi: questions
What is the status of New Mexico tribes v. Kalshi?
Pending. Four New Mexico tribes allege Kalshi's sports contracts are unauthorized class III gaming on their lands in violation of IGRA and their compacts, also citing UIGEA and Kalshi's 18+ age limit versus the compacts' 21+ rule. The Ninth Circuit's Blue Lake ruling is persuasive but not binding authority in this Tenth Circuit case. No rulings located; details from secondary sources.
What happened most recently in New Mexico tribes v. Kalshi?
May 12, 2026: Complaint filed.
Compiled from court dockets, opinions, regulator releases and news coverage, linked above. Not legal advice. All cases · Interactive tracker