Case 3:25-cv-02121-VDO Document 58-1 Filed 01/16/26 Page 13 of 29
percent of people trying to get signal about what’s going to happen in the world—like, ‘Is the Suez Canal going to be reopened?’ or whatever—you actually want insider trading.”). Further, if the CEA governs Coinbase’s sports-betting contracts (and potentially other forms of gaming) on Indians lands, then Congress must have intended to repeal key provisions of IGRA that expressly grant regulatory authority over such activity to tribes, states, the National Indian Gaming Commission (“NIGC”), the Department of the Interior, and the Department of Justice. See 25 U.S.C. §§ 2701(5), 2710(d); 18 U.S.C. § 1166(d). Congress also must have intended to completely override the entire purpose and function of IGRA, which is to recognize tribal sovereignty to conduct and regulate gaming activity that occurs on Indian lands. See 25 U.S.C. § 2701(5). No amount of judicial gymnastics can turn the insertion of the term “swap” in the CEA into such a radical transformation of IGRA. This Court should therefore reject Coinbase’s boundless interpretation of a “swap” and give effect to both statutes by excluding sports-betting contracts, such as Coinbase’s, from the CEA’s definition of “swap.” Such an interpretation, in any case, is more faithful to the CEA’s statutory language and legislative intent. See 156 Cong. Rec. S5907 (daily ed. July 15, 2010) (statement of Sen. Lincoln) (“It would be quite easy to construct an ‘event contract’ around sporting events such as the Super Bowl, the Kentucky Derby, and Masters Golf Tournament. These types of contracts would not serve any real commercial purpose. Rather, they would be used solely for gambling.”). D. Coinbases’s Theory Does Not Meet the Standard for Implied Repeals. Coinbase’s preemption argument, which relies on its overly broad interpretation of “swap,” must be rejected because it would manufacture an implied repeal of IGRA where none exists. Coinbase cannot meet the heavy burden of proving Congress intended to repeal IGRA because there is a reasonable interpretation of the CEA that gives full effect to both statutes: the
13
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs