Caesars announced Wednesday that it will offer online casinos in Maine through its three sports betting partners.
Partnering with those Wabanaki Nation tribes – Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation and the Penobscot Nation – was not guaranteed for Caesars despite the sports betting agreements. The long-term agreement means Caesars is will control 75% of the available online casino licenses in the state.
There has been no announcement on who the Passamaquoddy Tribe plans to partner with for the final online casino license. The tribe is partnered with DraftKings for its online sportsbook but other companies have shown interest in the market as well.
Maine Gov. Janet Mills signing the online casino bill in January was somewhat of a surprise considering her previous opposition to the bill. The law goes into effect in late July with Maine Gambling Control Unit Director Milt Champion saying he hopes the casinos could launch at the beginning of 2027.
All 3 Caesars brands launching
With its three licenses, Caesars is launching all of its online gaming brands in the state.
The Caesars combined sportsbook and casino platform along with standalone casino brands Caesars Palace and Horseshoe all offer “a distinct digital experience tailored to different player interests,” according to the release.
“Together, we’ve built a strong and responsible sports wagering experience, and this next phase reinforces our commitment to our tribal partners and to delivering a differentiated, localized digital gaming experience for Mainers,” said Caesars Digital President Eric Hession.
Caesars is taking its three-brand approach to any market it can, including the Alberta online casino and sports betting market launching next month.
Report: DraftKings helped beat People’s Veto
While DraftKings has not announced a deal to offer iGaming through the Passamaquoddy Tribe, it has been acting behind the scenes like it will, according to the Boston Globe.
The National Association Against iGaming said it would work on overturning the law through a People’s Veto, which puts the issue to a referendum after collecting around 68,000 signatures.
According to the Globe, there are only a handful of political firms that specialize in signature collecting in Maine. When those companies were reportedly contacted by the NAAiG, the group found that DraftKings had gotten there first and signed contracts with the firms, shutting the NAAiG out.
“NAAiG reviewed every available option to block the bill from becoming law,” the group said in a statement to the Globe. “Ultimately, our path to a People’s Veto was effectively blocked by a tidal wave of cash from iGaming industry supporters.”
DraftKings did not confirm any of those reports to the Globe and did not respond to LSR‘s requests for comment by publication.
Still a pending lawsuit
Churchill Downs, the operator of one of the state’s two commercial land-based casinos, sued to have the law invalidated. The company said the legislature “blessed a race-based monopoly” that awarded licenses to tribal partners only. Penn Entertainment operates the other casino but is not involved in the litigation.
The most recent development was last week, when the California Gaming Association filed a motion to file an amicus brief. At first glance that may seem peculiar, but the CGA is routinely challenging what the state’s card rooms can and cannot offer that still respects California gaming tribes’ exclusivity on most gambling activities.
From the proposed amicus brief:
“CGA and its members have an interest in upholding fundamental constitutional principles of equality before the law, especially with respect to the industry in which they participate. They recognize that ‘[d]istinctions between citizens solely because of their ancestry are by their very nature odious to a free people whose institutions are founded upon the doctrine of equality.’ SFFA v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181, 208 (2023). They know that ‘it demeans the dignity and worth of a person to be judged by ancestry instead of by his or her own merit and essential qualities.’ Id. at 220. And they believe that ‘[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.’ Id. at 206.”
Responses on the motion are due by July 10.
