Chavdar Vasilev is a journalist covering the casino and sports betting market sectors for CasinoBeats. He joined CasinoBeats in May 2025 and reports on industry-shaping stories across the US and beyond, including legislative debates, market...
Read Full BioThe San Manuel Band of Mission Indians is reportedly rejecting efforts to advance a commercial wagering framework for online sports betting in California — marking one of the strongest rebukes yet from a leading tribal government.
The move highlights the division among tribes as California edges toward renewed debates of legalizing sports betting, following the 2022 defeat of both tribal and commercial proposals.
The San Manuel Letter: Warning Against Commercial Expansion
In a letter, first reported by InGame, Yuhaaviatam of the San Manuel Nation Tribal Chair Lynn Valbuena pushes back on the “YES Pledge” for expanded gambling. Valbuena wrote that “the future of tribal government gaming in California is at risk.”
Also, a proposed commercial expansion “will provide large profits for them [commercial operators], while undermining the fabric of Indian Gaming in California.”
Valbuena laid out four “guiding principles” to “ensure we protect tribal government gaming for all federally recognized California tribes” for the long-term:
- Protect tribal sovereignty
- Preserve tribal gaming exclusivity
- Include limited and non-gaming tribes in future expansions
- Ensure responsible gaming measures in new gaming expansions
Valbuena also cautioned that some former San Manuel employees now working for commercial operators “do not have the best interests of tribes top of mind.” She warned that commercial operators “may not be being truthful and may steal customers from tribes.”
Jeff Grubbe, former Agua Caliente chair and now an SBA tribal advisor, responded to the letter on LinkedIn. In a post, he said the letter relied on “opinions, assumptions, and speculative outcomes — not verifiable facts.”
He wrote that assertions about sovereignty being “at risk” lacked factual basis, and that the idea “your customers become their customers” was “a prediction, not a demonstrable reality.”
The YES Pledge: Competing Visions of Tribal Unity
The YES Pledge first circulated in September 2025. It is a non-binding declaration circulated by the Sports Betting Alliance’s Tribal Advisory Council. It advocates for a framework of tribally governed online sports betting. The pledge states:
“We, the undersigned Tribal Nations of California, commit to working together to secure voter or legislative approval of a tribally governed framework for online sports betting.”
Supporters such as Grubbe insist that the pledge was “shaped, discussed, and advanced by tribal leaders with the aim of benefiting all tribes.” He states that commercial operators were informed but had no role in drafting the document.
The initiative calls for tribes to collaborate with organizations such as the California Nations Indian Gaming Association (CNIGA) and the Sports Betting Alliance. The latter represents major sportsbooks, such as DraftKings and FanDuel.
It aims to show a unified front and encourage legislative dialogue, particularly with non-gaming tribes who might otherwise be excluded from future digital betting revenue.
The initiative comes amid reports indicating that California voters appear more open to legalization. In the 2022 effort, California residents rejected two proposals to legalize online sports betting by large margins.
CNIGA’s Rejection & Industry Response
Notably, CNIGA, representing 53 tribes (including San Manuel), has not endorsed the YES Pledge. In a letter, CNIGA Chairman James Silva said the pledge appears to be a “corporate-driven maneuver.” Also, it “may cause confusion” by referencing tribal institutions without authorization.
At the same time, commercial operators have tried to build goodwill around the idea. At the Indian Gaming Tradeshow & Convention in San Diego, representatives from DraftKings and FanDuel pitched the idea of creating a single tribal entity to oversee statewide betting operations. Also, they pledged at least $10 million annually for non-gaming tribes if legalization passes.
DraftKings CEO Jason Robins emphasized that the legalization of online sports betting must be done in collaboration with Native American tribes.
Still, San Manuel’s letter underscores that not all tribes see the pledge as a path to sovereignty. For many, it represents an attempt by commercial operators to gain control of the process before tribes have achieved true consensus.
Tribes Fighting on Multiple Fronts
The San Manuel letter and the YES Pledge controversy reflect only one front in California tribes’ battle to protect gaming exclusivity in the state.
Sweepstakes Ban: A Clear Win
Unregulated gambling has been a big issue for tribal leaders. They recently scored a major legislative victory as Gov. Newsom signed Assembly Bill 831 into law. The bill bans dual-currency sweepstakes casinos — social gaming platforms that use virtual tokens redeemable for prizes.
CNIGA and leading tribes, including San Manuel, championed the measure. It passed swiftly through the Legislature without a single opposing vote. Tribes framed it as protecting consumers and tribal exclusivity from “gray-market” gambling operators.
DFS & Prediction Markets: Legal Gray Zones
Other unregulated forms of gambling on the tribes’ radar are daily fantasy sports (DFS) and prediction markets.
In July 2025, Attorney General Rob Bonta issued a legal opinion that DFS is illegal in the state. The opinion, welcomed by tribal leaders, does not change the law. Instead, it acts as an advisory interpretation of the law, intended to guide enforcement agencies and lawmakers.
After his opinions, most leading platforms, such as Underdog and PrizePicks, switched to peer-to-peer formats. Also, it has led to numerous lawsuits against DFS operators.
Simultaneously, several tribes have filed or backed complaints against prediction markets such as Kalshi and Robinhood. They claim these platforms effectively offer unlicensed gambling under the guise of financial trading, undermining tribal gaming exclusivity.
Those disputes remain unresolved, with tribal lawyers citing jurisdictional conflicts under both state and federal law.
Cardrooms: A Major Legal Setback
The tribes recently suffered a setback in another battleground: their fight with the state’s cardrooms.
The tribes have long argued that cardrooms are illegally offering casino games. In 2024, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 549, which aims to grant the tribes legal sovereignty, enabling them to sue.
However, recently, a Sacramento Superior Court judge struck down a tribal lawsuit filed under Senate Bill 549. She ruled that federal law preempts such claims.
The decision favored dozens of cardrooms. It marked a blow to tribal efforts to block so-called “third-party proposition player” games that tribes contend infringe on their compacts.
Many industry observers suggest the issue may reach the Supreme Court.
The Broader Stakes
San Manuel’s rejection of the commercial model underscores a fundamental reality: California’s gaming future hinges on tribal unity more than legislative timing.
Valbuena warned that “the future of tribal government gaming in California is at risk.” She argues that commercial operators are looking to profit, undermining the “fabric of Indian Gaming” in the state. Her letter urged tribes to “protect tribal sovereignty,” “preserve exclusivity,” and make sure any new model “includes limited and non-gaming tribes.”
With CNIGA not backing up the YES Pledge and San Manuel clearly opposing, California could remain years away from consensus on sports betting.
Until then, the largest untapped betting market in the US will stay off-limits for commercial operators. At the same time, unregulated forms, such as prediction markets, are poised to gain momentum.
