California Judge Blocks AG Bonta’s Cardroom Blackjack Rules

A California judge issued a preliminary injunction blocking Attorney General Rob Bonta and the Bureau of Gambling Control from enforcing new cardroom regulations that would have significantly restricted blackjack-style games across the state. The ruling allows cardrooms to continue operating as usual for now.

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Richard Darwin ruled Thursday that the California Gaming Association (CGA) is likely to succeed in its argument that the Bureau exceeded its authority when adopting the regulations. The rules went into effect on April 1, with enforcement scheduled to begin on June 1.

The ruling temporarily stops enforcement as litigation proceeds. The Court found the Bureau likely lacks authority under California’s Gambling Control Act to unilaterally impose statewide restrictions on the games at issue.

The Court also found evidence that the Bureau’s enforcement of the regulations would irreparably injure cardrooms and their communities.

The dispute centers on regulations submitted by the Bureau and approved earlier this year by the California Office of Administrative Law. The rules would effectively eliminate blackjack-style games in cardrooms and significantly tighten restrictions on third-party proposition player services (TPPPS)

Judge Questions Bureau’s Authority Over Blackjack Rules

According to a Courthouse News report, Darwin repeatedly questioned whether the Bureau had the legal authority to create statewide standards governing blackjack-style games.

The structure of the Gambling Control Act is not a thing of beauty,” Darwin said.

However, the judge added that “what is clear is that the rulemaking power claimed by the bureau isn’t found in the act.”

Representing the California Department of Justice, attorney Sharon O’Grady argued the Bureau has authority to determine what constitutes a legal controlled game in California.

What is a card game goes to the heart of what is legal,” O’Grady argued.

But attorney Jeremy Kreisberg, representing the CGA, argued the Legislature granted statewide rulemaking authority to the California Gambling Control Commission, not the Bureau itself.

The Bureau has the power to approve games,” Kreisberg said. “But that’s a separate question from who sets the standard for what kinds of games can be played in the state.”

Darwin ultimately adopted his tentative ruling and granted the injunction.

The preliminary injunction can remain in place for up to 45 days. Another hearing is scheduled for June 30.

Cardrooms Warned Regulations Could Devastate Industry

The CGA framed the ruling as a major victory for cardrooms and local communities that rely on gambling tax revenue.

Today’s ruling validates what we have said all along: Attorney General Bonta and the Bureau of Gambling Control exceeded their authority by attempting to rewrite California gaming law,” said Kyle Kirkland, CGA President.

These regulations were driven by pressure from powerful tribal gaming interests that have long sought to eliminate lawful competition from California’s cardrooms.”

The association argued the regulations threatened thousands of jobs and critical city revenues tied to cardroom taxes.

According to the Attorney General’s own economic analysis cited by the CGA, the regulations could have eliminated more than 50% of statewide cardroom revenues.

The CGA also argued that the rules threatened funding streams for local governments’ police, fire protection, youth programs, and other city services.

In a previous statement to Gambling Insider, City of Hawaiian Gardens Councilmember Victor Farfan said that almost two-thirds of the city’s $20 million in general fund revenue comes from The Gardens Casino, one of the largest cardrooms in the state.

Tribal Casinos and Cardrooms Continue Long-Running Dispute

The fight over blackjack-style games has been ongoing in California for nearly two decades.

Under California law, tribal casinos hold exclusive rights to traditional banked casino games such as blackjack and baccarat. Cardrooms, however, have long used TPPPS to facilitate similar games. Tribal gaming groups have long argued that cardrooms improperly circumvent California’s tribal exclusivity protections by using TPPPS structures to simulate banked casino games.

In 2024, California lawmakers passed SB 549, a law that allowed tribes to challenge cardrooms in state court, which they did.

However, in August 2025, a Superior Court judge ruled that tribes cannot sue under SB 549. The judge said the law conflicted with the federal Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. The Court later adopted that tentative ruling as its final order in October, effectively dismissing the case and blocking tribes from using state courts to challenge cardroom blackjack and player-dealer structures.