"We do not negotiate with terrorists," the California tribes said to the operators of the sweepstakes.

 Victor Rocha, the host of the most recent installment of the New Normal webinar series, stated that there is no opportunity for debate between California tribes and sweepstakes operators in the most recent installment, which took place today (November 21).  We are now in a position to investigate possible enforcement measures.
 Flags of the United States and California
 Rocha, who serves as the conference chair for the Indian Gaming Association (IGA), was accompanied by Jason Giles, who is also employed by the IGA and serves as the executive director.  The individual who was invited to speak this week was Jonodev Chaudhuri, who is the principal at Chaudhuri Law and formerly served as the chair of the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC).

 The episodes were centred around the concepts of regulation and enforcement.  To be more specific, Rocha and Giles wanted to know what tactics the National Institute of Gaming Control (NIGC) as well as state and federal governments can employ in order to combat the spread of sweepstakes websites.

 According to Rocha, "You can see that the entire industry is reacting to this matter."  Specifically, he remarked that "you're starting to see the outrage" that often follows attempts to encroach on tribal exclusivity among California tribes. He said this in reference to the state of California.

 In a later statement, he stated that there is no room for cooperation between sweepstakes and tribes.  According to what he said, "We do not negotiate with terrorists; this is not a dialogue, and this is not a discussion about anything."

 NIGC needs to be "reactive," according to Chaudhuri.
 Chaudhuri, who was the chair of the National Indian Gaming Commission from 2013 to 2019, investigated the complexities of tribal gaming regulation.  He went over the background of the Indian gambling Regulatory Act (IGRA), which was a piece of federal legislation that was passed in 1988 and helped to set the foundation for Indian gambling in the United States.  Additionally, the Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) was founded as a result of the Indian Gaming Regulation Act (IGRA).

 Chaudhuri recognised that the commission's capabilities are somewhat restricted when it comes to the execution of the law.  In addition to serving as a link between the government and the tribes themselves, the National Indian Gaming Commission (NIGC) is the primary regulator of tribal affairs.  There are numerous instances in which states play a little part in the regulation process.  At the same time, the commission is essentially restricted to the direction provided by IGRA.  In light of this, it is difficult to stay ahead of the curve when it comes to new innovations.

 "In many ways, the National Investigation and Government Commission (NIGC) needs to be somewhat reactive," Chaudhuri remarked.

 However, he did make a point to mention during the conversation that the Indian Gaming Revenue Act (IGRA) contains explicit stipulations that requires tribes to be the principal beneficiary and to have sole ownership rights in gaming operations.  In addition to that, it provides precise principles for the protection of Indian lands.

 "It is a violation of the Indian Gaming Registration Act (IGRA) if there is gaming taking place on tribal lands that are not managed by the tribe," he stated.  A discussion about what is actually taking place is required in order to understand how it relates to sweepstakes.

 For California tribes, there are a variety of enforcement alternatives.
 According to Chaudhuri, there are various enforcement methods available in the event that it is established that an entity is operating illegally on tribal property.  They are applicable to any entity, whether it be a commercial institution or a tribal organisation, as in the case of sweepstakes.

 For instance, he cited the imposition of fines and the issuance of closure orders.  "I did letters like that when I was [at the NIGC]," he recalled. "I remember doing that."  Games can also be reviewed by the NIGC at the request of tribes, and the NIGC can decide whether or not the games are classified as Class II or Class III.  The reviews, on the other hand, are far more challenging to write when the game's provider is not participating, and it would appear that this is the situation with sweepstakes and contests.

 Tribes, which are the principal regulators, are also able to take similar enforcement procedures because they are the primary regulators.  In their inquiry, Rocha and Giles enquired as to whether or not, in principle, all of the gaming tribes in the state may collectively take such action against sweepstakes operators.

 The statement that it is theoretically possible was made by Chaudhuri, although he did not go so far as to approve it.  On the other hand, he emphasised once more that this is applicable to tribal lands and mentioned that there "is not one uniform compact" in the state of California.  There is a separate agreement between each tribe and the state.

 Compacts are an important topic to discuss in this context.
 The significance of compacts in this discussion was brought up on multiple occasions.  Chaudhuri made the observation that "a lot of compacts will have provisions in the revenue-sharing portions" of the agreements that render them null and unenforceable in the event that any unlawful expansion or breach of exclusivity occurs.

 As a general rule, Indian Country does not have to pay taxes to a state for gaming activities that take place on its personal property.  However, there are instances in which tribes choose to enter into revenue-sharing arrangements with states.  In the state of Florida, for instance, the Seminole tribe is required to pay the state hundreds of millions of dollars annually as part of the deal that it has with the state.  However, beginning in 2019, the tribe withheld those payments on the grounds that the state was permitting commercial card rooms to encroach upon its exclusive rights.

 As a result of the fact that states frequently reap the benefits of revenue sharing, they have an interest in putting an end to sweepstakes in order to guarantee that their income reduction will not be annulled.  To persuading state and federal leaders to realise the significance of the matter is a difficult task, even for the National Intelligence Group (NIGC).

 Chaudhuri stated that the educational challenge is one that never seems to stop.  The National Indian Government Commission (NIGC) is continually working with other officials and agencies to acknowledge the significance of Native American issues, as he noted.  This obstacle is not only applicable to sweepstakes, but also to skill games, card rooms, and other types of gambling that have the potential to be perceived as an intrusion into exclusive territory.

 The situation is deteriorating with each passing week.
 In conclusion, Giles and Rocha emphasised once more the significance of the matter in relation to American Indian tribes in the state of California.

 Giles bemoaned, "This is getting worse by the week," notably referring to the recent opening of the Legendz social casino and sportsbook in 43 states, including California. "This is getting worse by the week," Giles said.  Rocha concurred and compared the situation to that of a corporation constructing a dam upstream from a reservation location.  According to him, the ramifications might not be immediately evident, but there is little doubt that potential infrastructure would be impacted in the future.

 When asked about the need to talk to tribes in Connecticut and other states that look to be taking a more direct approach to these locations, Rocha indicated that talking to them is necessary for future episodes.

 The conclusion he reached was that "the industry is behind us, but we have to lead."  "We are not unfamiliar with being in that position either."