Case: 25-7504, 01/16/2026, DktEntry: 38.1, Page 9 of 47
INTERESTS OF AMICI CURIAE Massachusetts, California, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connect- icut, Delaware, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Mary- land, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mex- ico, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wash- ington State, and the District of Columbia (collectively, Amicus States) respectfully submit this brief in support of appellants and reversal. See Fed. R. App. P. 29(a)(2). The Amicus States have varying approaches to the issue of sports wagering, reflecting their respective policy judgments. In some states, sports wagering is regulated and offered only by licensed sportsbooks; in others, it is illegal. Through the framework of cooperative federalism established by the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA), 25 U.S.C. § 2701 et seq. , these varied approaches also apply to sports wagering on Indian lands within the Amicus States. That is because, under IGRA, sports wagering is legal on Indian lands only if it is legal in the state where such lands are located. See 25 U.S.C. § 2710(d)(1)(B). The Court’s resolution of this case thus has the potential to affect not just tribal sov- ereignty, but also the states’ authority to regulate gambling within their
1
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs