California Judge Rules Against State Limitation on Cardrooms

A San Francisco Superior Court Judge ordered California Attorney General Rob Bonta’s office to stand down regarding regulations of the state’s cardroom industry.

on June 30 overruled new protocols revealed by the California Bureau of Gambling Control in February (CBGC). These protocols would have restricted player-dealer positions by forcing players to rotate from a table every 40 minutes and banned blackjack-style games in licensed gambling dens.

The judge ultimately decided that licensed cardrooms possessed the authority to offer these products to customers, so long as they were compliant with their regulations.

What caused the dispute?

California cardrooms have offered gaming options to customers for decades, while circumventing the state’s ban on “Las Vegas” and tribal casino-style gaming, in which customers wager money against the house.

That had come under challenge by the CBGC. A successful installment of the protocols would’ve resulted in cardrooms losing their right to offer blackjack-style and other table games.

The judge’s decision was as straightforward as they come as he sided with the California Gaming Association. 

“The bureau did not have the authority to issue statewide regulations,” Darwin said, per Courthouse News.

The California Gaming Association’s president commended the judge’s "significant" decision, which upholds an industry that was estimated to produce business tax receipts of $31 million for 2025-26

“We really appreciate the judge seeing it as we saw it in our papers, and that was that the bureau overreached in this effort,” Kyle Kirkland told Courthouse News after the hearing. “It’s a significant win, not only for the cardroom industry, but for all the cities and people and everyone that relies on us, so we’re obviously very pleased with it.”

The nitty-gritty

The CBGC’s rules were supposed to go into effect on April 1 and be enforced on June 1. Darwin temporarily blocked the regulator from enforcing the rules, ruling that the Gambling Control Act didn’t give the Bureau the power to institute these changes.

Attorney Jeremy Kreisberg of Munger, Tolles & Olson argued on behalf of the state on Tuesday that the Bureau only had the power to approve individual games. The right to unconditionally prohibit games was left to the California Gambling Control Commission (CGCC), whose members are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the Senate.

The CGCC is also under the scope of the Justice Department, which is controlled by the Attorney General. 

“In our view, it could not be clearer that the power to set gaming standards statewide and categorically prohibit games statewide is a power the act gives to the commission,” Kreisberg said.

Attorney Sharon O’Grady, representing the California Attorney General’s office, contested that, saying the bureau is primarily responsible for regulating gaming options.

Bonta’s office released a statement after the ruling, claiming it was “disappointed” in the judge and would review its options. It did not commit to filing an appeal.