reinforces the longstanding view that IGRA’s comprehensive structure dominates the regulation of gaming on Indian lands. In fact, Congress went so far as to authorize the CFTC to prohibit transactions involving gaming as contrary to the national public interest, and the CFTC did so categorically. None of this alters IGRA’s comprehensive regulatory regime. Kalshi’s sports betting operation rests entirely on its assertion that it alone has the preemptive authority to self-certify that its gaming activities are not actually gaming in violation of the CEA, CFTC regulations, IGRA, or other federal statutes governing gaming such as the UIGEA and the Wire Act. 5 It is inconceivable that Congress would have granted boards of trade the authority to offer and accept sports betting throughout the United States— including on Indian lands—without explicitly stating as much, especially in the face of comprehensive statutes and regulations governing gaming on Indian lands. It is axiomatic that “Congress . . . does not alter the fundamental details of a regulatory scheme in vague terms or ancillary provisions—it does not, one might say, hide elephants in mouseholes.” Whitman v. Am. Trucking Ass’ns , 531 U.S. 457, 468 (2001).
5 See 31 U.S.C. § 5361 et seq. ; 18 U.S.C. § 1084.
8
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs