Florida Judge Dismisses Challenge to Seminole Tribe’s Sports Betting Compact

A Florida state judge has dismissed the latest lawsuit seeking to invalidate the Seminole Tribe’s landmark sports betting compact with the state, ruling that the plaintiff, Protect the Constitution LLC, lacked standing to bring the case.

While the decision keeps Florida’s sports betting market under Seminole control, it leaves unresolved broader questions about the state’s constitutional limits on gambling expansion.

Judge Tosses ‘Protect the Constitution’ Challenge

Leon County Circuit Judge Jonathan Sjostrom ruled that the Tallahassee-based organization failed “to provide meaningful information regarding the identity, activities, location, business, and business methods of its constituent members, it fails to allege facts to demonstrate standing.”

Sjostrom did not weigh in on the subject of the complaint. That’s whether the 2021 gaming compact violates Florida’s 2018 constitutional amendment, which requires voter approval for casino gambling.

The judge gave the plaintiff until November 21 to refile an amended complaint that establishes standing. The ruling marks the latest in a string of court victories for the Tribe, which has fended off challenges in both federal and state courts since 2021.

The 2021 Gaming Compact

The disputed agreement, approved by the Florida Legislature and signed into law by Governor Ron DeSantis in 2021, expanded the Seminole Tribe’s gaming rights under the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA). It essentially gave the Tribe a monopoly over sports betting in the nation’s third most populous state.

The compact introduced a so-called “hub-and-spoke” model. It allows mobile sports wagers (“spokes”) to be placed from anywhere in Florida, as long as the bets are processed by servers located on the Seminole Tribe’s sovereign land (“hub”).

That legal argument — that wagers “occur” where the servers sit — has been the cornerstone of the Tribe’s argument that its statewide sports betting operation complies with federal law. Notably, a judge in Colorado recently ruled that gaming occurs where the bettor is located, not where the tribal servers process the bet.

In return, the Seminole compact granted the state a minimum of $2.5 billion over the first five years. It also allowed the Tribe to offer craps and roulette at its land-based casinos. As the Seminole Tribe said at the time of the compact’s approval, “[a]ll the people of Florida are winners.”

From Shutdown to Supreme Court Victory

The same year, the Tribe launched its Hard Rock Bet sportsbook, but it was short-lived, as a US District Judge, Dabney Friedrich, struck down the compact. The judge found that it violated IGRA by authorizing bets off tribal lands.

That decision stemmed from a lawsuit filed by West Flagler Associates and Bonita-Fort Myers Corporation, owners of Florida pari-mutuel venues. They argued the compact violated IGRA by authorizing betting off tribal lands.

In 2023, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the lower court’s decision. It determined the compact “addresses,” but did not authorize off-reservation betting itself. The court determined that, as the Tribe’s servers accepted the wagers, the compact did not violate IGRA. Hard Rock Bet relaunched its sportsbook in November 2023 following the appellate ruling.

The case reached the US Supreme Court. In June 2024, the Court declined to hear the appeal, effectively siding with the appellate court’s decision.

West Flagler also fought on the state level. That case reached the Florida Supreme Court. The plaintiff sought to invalidate the compact, arguing that it violated Florida’s 2018 Constitutional Amendment 3. The court rejected that challenge in March 2024, finding the petition procedurally improper rather than deciding the constitutional issue.

The ‘Protect the Constitution’ Lawsuit: A New Front

After the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene, Protect the Constitution filed a new case in April 2025.

The plaintiff alleged that mobile sports betting amounts to “casino gambling.” Therefore, it argued that it requires approval by Florida voters under Amendment 3. The provision states that “the people of the State of Florida shall have the exclusive right to decide whether to authorize casino gambling in the State of Florida.”

In June, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier‘s office urged Judge Sjostrom to dismiss the suit. Uthmeier argued that Protect the Constitution lacked standing. Also, he stated that the compact is consistent with Amendment 3 because bets are deemed to occur on tribal lands.

This week’s dismissal confirmed that reasoning on procedural grounds. It leaves open the possibility of future lawsuits if another plaintiff can demonstrate concrete injury.

However, for now, the state and Tribe maintain their position that sports wagering via tribal servers does not require a statewide referendum.