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 BioApproximately three weeks after he declared daily fantasy sports (DFS) illegal in the state, California Attorney General Rob Bonta has warned that he will take action against platforms that are still operating.
Bonta spoke publicly for the first time regarding his July 3 legal opinion, which classified DFS as illegal because it requires participants to pay money in exchange for a chance to win.
Despite his legal opinion, no DFS operator has left the state. However, several, including Underdog Fantasy and PrizePicks, have transitioned to a peer-to-peer format. These new models claim to comply with California law by emphasizing competition between users rather than the house.
DFS contests emerged from a carveout for fantasy contests in the federal prohibition against sports betting that existed until 2018. Compared to traditional season-long fantasy contests, the “daily” version offers an experience that is closer to sports betting. Even now, DFS is legal in more places than sports betting.
It’s important to note that Bonta did not address traditional season-long fantasy sports in his opinion.
Bonta Says Laws are Meant to be Enforced
In an interview, Bonta told Sacramento news outlet KCRA 3:
“The next step is our enforcement, and laws are meant to be enforced.”
KCRA 3 asked Bonta why he decided to release the legal opinion two years after Senator Scott Wilk, who’s no longer in office, initially requested it, and after the state’s last two attorneys general, Xavier Becerra and Kamala Harris, had refused. Underdog Fantasy used that argument when it unsuccessfully tried to sue Bonta for releasing the opinion.
Bonta responded by saying he is the first attorney general to receive a formal request specifically for the legal opinion:
“It’s our duty, not our discretion, but we are mandated, we shall respond and provide an opinion as appropriately requested under the law.”
“We must, and we did.”
When the news outlet asked him if he would take action against DFS platforms that continue to operate, he responded: “Absolutely.”
Bonta’s Opinion: DFS Resembles Sports Betting, Not Skill-Based Contests
In his opinion, the attorney general argues that DFS functions similarly to wagering on sports events, rather than skill-based contests. Underdog Fantasy claims that its games rely on skill rather than chance.
Bonta acknowledged that participants exercise skill in contests like draft-style DFS to select athletes and rosters. However, he noted that they do not compete in or influence the outcome of the sports events. Their success depends entirely on outcomes beyond their control, much like sports betting.
Furthermore, Bonta points out that operators set prize structures and odds that don’t depend on the number of entrants. That makes the contest more similar to traditional gambling products than recreational competitions.
Peer-to-Peer DFS Also Considered Illegal
The attorney general also believes peer-to-peer DFS is illegal. In these contests, users play against each other. The odds and payouts depend on each user’s performance relative to other contestants in the pool.
However, Bonta makes it clear that these contests are also illegal. That’s because players risk money on the outcomes of third-party sports performances.
Operators Switch Formats in Attempt to Evade Scrutiny
In response to Bonta’s opinion, some of the most popular DFS platforms have changed their rules in California by allowing only peer-to-peer contests.
This strategy is not new. Operators have made similar shifts in other states facing regulatory scrutiny. The player-vs-house “pick ‘em” contests feature fixed odds and payouts, and have faced scrutiny nationwide.
With several states issuing regulatory orders against them, operators like Underdog Fantasy switched to peer-to-peer and continue to operate in states like Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, and Michigan.
The contest change provides platforms with an argument that peer-to-peer fantasy is a private contest of skill, not subject to gambling laws. Moreover, these contests remove the house as a participant, giving operators a stronger legal defense in states like California, where playing against the house is classified as illegal gambling.
Still, as Bonta has made it clear, peer-to-peer DFS is also illegal. That means he will likely pursue all platforms, even those that have changed their rules.
