California Cardrooms Block DOJ Blackjack Ban With 45-Day Injunction
California Cardrooms Win Temporary Block on DOJ Blackjack Ban
Judge Richard Darwin granted the 45-day injunction after finding "clear and convincing evidence" that the Bureau of Gambling Control exceeded its statutory authority when it adopted the new rules. Darwin concluded that cardrooms are very likely to prevail on their core argument - that the Bureau acted beyond the jurisdiction granted to it by California law. The next hearing is scheduled for June 30, 2026.
The regulations, approved by the California Office of Administrative Law on February 6, 2026, and originally set to take effect April 1, 2026, would have explicitly prohibited any game of blackjack, required games to offer the player-dealer position to seated patrons before each hand and rotate the role to at least two non-TPPPS players every 40 minutes, and restricted third-party proposition player services to one per table. The state's own economic analysis projected the rules could eliminate more than 50% of cardroom revenues statewide and thousands of jobs. The Attorney General's office acknowledged the ruling and signaled it will respond in court, widely read as a signal it intends to appeal.
Why the Bureau of Gambling Control's Authority Is Under Fire
The central legal dispute is jurisdictional. Attorney Jeremy Kreisberg, representing the California Gaming Association, argued that statewide rulemaking authority over cardroom games belongs to the California Gambling Control Commission, not the Bureau of Gambling Control, which sits under the Department of Justice. State attorneys countered that the Bureau and DOJ hold exclusive jurisdiction to make such changes, but Judge Darwin's ruling sided with the cardrooms on that question.
The financial stakes for local governments are severe. Hawaiian Gardens' Gardens Casino generates roughly $13 million of the city's approximately $20 million general fund (65%), Bell Gardens' Parkwest Bicycle Casino provides about 50% of the city's general fund, and City of Commerce's eponymous casino contributes 40% of the city's general fund. Commerce had already placed a quarter-cent sales tax measure on the June 2026 ballot to offset potential losses. The California Gaming Association filed two lawsuits in San Francisco Superior Court in March 2026 challenging the regulations, supported by the California Cardroom Alliance and Communities for California Cardrooms.
Decades of Tribal-Cardroom Rivalry Behind the Regulatory Push
The regulations are the latest move in a long-running dispute over gaming exclusivity in California. Tribal casinos hold the exclusive right under state law to offer house-banked games, those where players compete directly against the casino. Cardrooms have operated under a player-dealer model for decades, using third-party proposition player services to fill seats and bankroll games, arguing this structure keeps competition player-to-player rather than player-versus-house. The DOJ's position has been that the model functions as house banking in all but name. With the 45-day injunction now in place, cardrooms can continue dealing blackjack while litigation proceeds, but the underlying conflict - and the Attorney General's intent to fight on - means the industry's legal uncertainty is far from resolved.
Article created in partnership with marvnBoost - the world's top iGaming AI powered Content Infrastructure.
Member discussion