Oxford Casino, one of Maine’s two commercial casinos, has filed a lawsuit against the state of Maine, aiming to block the implementation of a new law that grants exclusive online casino gaming rights to the state’s federally recognized tribes. The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maine on January 23, 2026, claims that the new law discriminates against non-tribal businesses and violates both the U.S. and Maine constitutions.
Race-Based Monopoly Allegations
The lawsuit, which was filed by Churchill Downs Incorporated, the parent company of Oxford Casino, argues that the new legislation, known as LD 1164, constitutes a “race-based monopoly.” The law, signed by Governor Janet Mills without her veto, allows the four federally recognized Wabanaki Nations—the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation, the Passamaquoddy Tribe, and the Penobscot Nation—to exclusively offer online casino games in Maine. Oxford Casino contends that this move unfairly discriminates against out-of-state businesses, effectively shutting them out of the new online gaming market.
Oxford Casino is seeking an injunction to prevent the law from taking effect. The casino argues that the new iGaming market would harm both their business and the state’s economy, highlighting the significant investments they have made in Maine. As reported by Portland Press Herald, in the lawsuit, the casino states, “Promoting iGaming through race-based preferences deals a gut-wrenching blow to Maine businesses like Oxford Casino that have heavily invested in the state and its people.”
The lawsuit points to a study conducted by The Innovation Group, which suggests that the introduction of online gaming typically leads to a 16% decline in revenue for land-based casinos. According to the lawsuit, this drop in revenue could result in the loss of approximately 378 jobs, a $22 million loss in labor income, and a $60 million decrease in Maine’s economic output. Oxford Casino, which employs 364 people and contributed over $40 million in state taxes in 2025, claims that the law will severely impact its financial stability.
Furthermore, the casino is requesting a fair opportunity to compete for an iGaming license. Although Oxford Casino would be interested in applying for such a license, it argues that it is ineligible under the current law, which restricts licenses to businesses wholly owned by the tribes.
Support for the Tribes and the Political Backdrop
The passage of LD 1164 marked a significant victory for the Wabanaki Nations, who have long sought a foothold in Maine’s gambling industry. The tribes were previously granted the exclusive right to operate sports betting in the state in 2023, generating $66 million in profits. Wabanaki chiefs praised the legislation, viewing it as a much-needed step toward addressing the historic exclusion of their communities from the state’s gambling market.
However, Oxford Casino, which has dominated Maine’s gambling industry for years, views the new law as an unconstitutional preference for the tribes. The complaint argues that the state is violating the Equal Protection Clauses of both the U.S. and Maine constitutions by allowing only federally recognized tribes to participate in the iGaming market. The casino’s owners contend that the law undermines fair competition and limits economic opportunity for businesses like theirs.
The legal battle over Maine’s iGaming law could have significant implications for the future of gambling in the state. Should the court uphold the law, Maine would join a growing list of states offering online casino gaming, including New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. However, if the lawsuit succeeds, the law could be overturned, potentially delaying the rollout of online gaming in the state.
The iGaming legislation has also faced opposition from the National Association Against iGaming (NAAiG), which is preparing to launch a petition campaign seeking a public referendum to block the law. The outcome of this lawsuit could determine whether Maine’s new iGaming law will be implemented or face further legal challenges.
Sponsored by:
