US State-by-State Gambling Laws (Local & Online)

Find out what types of gambling are legal, or illegal, in your state.

Here we summarize gambling laws by state. Click on the name of a State in the table below to learn about each state’s gambling laws. Before acting on any information contained on LetsGambleUSA.com, you should seek the advice of a local attorney.

LGUSA Header

In the United States, gambling laws vary wildly from state to state. That’s largely because the federal government leaves it to individual states to write their own gambling laws. So, what’s legal in casino-friendly Nevada may not be permitted across the border in gamble-shy Utah, for example. Unwittingly participating in an unlicensed gambling operation could land you in legal trouble. That’s why knowing your rights and the local gambling laws can stand you in good stead.

Most state gambling laws prohibit unlicensed games, wagers, or bets that have outcomes that rely at least partially upon some element of chance. However, if a competition or game awards prizes to winners based on skill, such as in shooting competitions or car racing, then it is not considered gambling. (Some other restrictions in the law may still apply in order for these activities to be considered legal).

In general, how you differentiate a game of chance from a game of skill depends on which of the two elements has the biggest impact on the game’s outcome. If chance is the bigger factor, then it will be classified as a game of chance, and wagering on these types of games will be considered gambling.

And even though some form of gambling is now legal in most states, it is still highly regulated. Betting pools, small-time poker clubs, fantasy football leagues, and skill-gaming machines are technically illegal in a lot of jurisdictions, though enforcement is rather difficult and often lax, depending on the state.

The following excerpts include certain state constitutional provisions specifically about gambling, “aiding and abetting” provisions of the state’s criminal laws, basic criminal gambling laws, and some references to the legalized gaming laws in a few of the states. Coverage of state charitable gaming laws is provided by links on our Charitable Gaming page.

US Online Gambling Laws by State – Where is it Legal?

The legality of online gambling depends on where you live in the USA and the type of gambling itself. Although the Supreme Court’s 2018 rejection of PASPA, the federal prohibition on sports betting, led to unprecedented gambling expansion, it has also contributed to the complexity of the legality of Internet gambling.

The following points might help you understand how gambling legislation in the US works.

  • Most US states and jurisdictions target gaming operators, not those who gamble online.
  • Many states have not regulated online gambling laws, meaning they still rely on outdated laws implemented long before the Internet existed.
  • Many gambling sites accepting US customers are properly licensed by offshore jurisdictions.
  • Gambling websites must observe US law and regulatory requirements.

So, the unregulated environment tacitly allows online gambling, although it is a legally gray area. Unless the law clearly draws a line between what is legal and what is not, it is permissible. It means that betting online or playing table games and live casino games through the top gambling sites are not illegal.

Our analysis is based on thorough research and a comparison study of the US gambling laws. Still, we are not legal experts, and you should consult with an attorney before playing online in your state.

So, what states allow online gambling? Let’s take a look:

Overall, the list of states where online gambling is legal is small but growing.

History & Evolution of US Online Gambling Laws

  • 1961 – Federal Act Wire: Initially, this law outlawed interstate wagering on sports but did not address other forms of gambling.
  • Early 1990s: The advent of online gambling. At this time, no legal guidelines were in place to regulate these platforms, making it easy for US players to access their services.
  • 2006 Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA): This law did not explicitly ban online gaming but prohibited US-based payment processors and other financial institutions from processing transactions involving online gaming services. The law forced many online gambling operators to move their businesses offshore.
  • 2011 DOJ Opinion – In 2011, the DOJ stated that the Wire Act related to sports betting only and therefore did not prohibit online casino gaming and poker. This paved the way for states like Delaware, New Jersey, Nevada, and later Pennsylvania and West Virginia, to license and regulate online gaming.
  • 2018 – Repeal of PASPA (Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act): The US Supreme Court’s repeal of PASPA, the federal prohibition on sports betting, permitted individual states to legalize sports books, offering a new avenue for online gambling.
  • Post-2018: Online sports betting began to be regulated on a gradual, state-by-state basis. By January 2023, mobile sports betting was legal in 26 states and Washington DC.
  • Ongoing: Offshore websites continue to offer casino-type games and sports betting to US-based players, but payments can be an issue. Players are urged to check the licensing and regulation of these sites before playing to ensure they’re not signing up for a blacklisted casino.

State Social Gaming Laws and Penalties for Illegal Gambling

The five topics covered on a state-by-state basis in the chart below are:

  • Dominant Factor Test Applied: “Chance” is one of the elements generally required to be present for a game to violate a state gambling statute. Most states have concluded that where the elements of skill, whatever they may be, predominate over the elements of chance, whatever they may be, in determining the outcome, then the “chance” element is lacking, and the game does not violate that state’s gambling laws.
  • Social Gambling Allowed: The question here is whether playing for money in a purely social context is allowed. A “social context” usually means that no player or other person earns anything from the management of a contest or game, such as acting as the “house” or taking a rake in a poker game.
  • Misdemeanor vs. Felony: What constitutes a “misdemeanor” versus a “felony” is not consistent in all states. Some states distinguish on the basis of the place of possible incarceration. That is, sentencing to a city or county jail versus sentencing to a state penitentiary defines the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony in some jurisdictions. Most states, however, draw the distinction based on the term of the possible sentence, with a punishment of one year or less being a misdemeanor and a longer sentence defining a felony. The latter approach is used in compiling the chart (below).
  • Simple vs. Aggravated: The distinction between “simple” and “aggravated” gambling is also one that varies from state to state.  That terminology may not be used in a state’s criminal law at all. It may be phrased as mere “gambling” versus “professional gambling”. It may come into play only based on second or third violations of a given criminal prohibition. The approach used in compiling the chart is generally based on the presence of professional gambling, which involves those who make money from the contest or game, i.e. an “operator,” as opposed to a mere participant or player.
  • Express Internet Prohibition: This pertains to whether a state has adopted a specific law criminalizing the offering of online casinos and/or playing of gambling games offered over the Internet. The fact that a state has not passed a specific law does not make participation in or offering of gambling over the Internet legal under the laws of that state. The question is a complex one and is addressed in several of the articles included on this site.
StateDominant Factor Test AppliedSocial Gambling AllowedPenalty for Simple GamblingPenalty for Aggravated GamblingExpress Internet Prohibition
AlabamaYesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
AlaskaYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
ArizonaNoYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
ArkansasNoNoPettyMisdemeanorNo
CaliforniaEffectively, YesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
ColoradoQuestionableYesPettyMisdemeanorNo
ConnecticutYesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
DelawareQuestionableYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
Dist. of ColumbiaYesProbablyFelonyFelonyNo
FloridaNo$10 Limit (1)MisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
GeorgiaYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
HawaiiYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
IdahoYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
IllinoisNoNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorYes
IndianaYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyYes
IowaNoNo(2)MisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
KansasYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
KentuckyYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
LouisianaNoYesMisdemeanorFelonyYes
MaineYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
MarylandNoNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
MassachusettsYesUnclearMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
MichiganYesNo (3)MisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo (4)
MinnesotaYesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
MississippiYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
MissouriYesNoMisdemeanor (5)FelonyNo
MontanaQuestionableYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorYes
NebraskaYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
NevadaYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyYes
New HampshireYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
New JerseyQuestionableYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo (6)
New MexicoYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
New YorkQuestionsbleYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
North CarolinaYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
North DakotaYesYes (7)MisdemeanorFelonyNo
OhioYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
OklahomaYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
OregonYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyYes
PennsylvaniaYesUnclearMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
Rhode IslandYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
South CarolinaYesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
South DakotaYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorYes (8)
TennesseeQuestionableNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
TexasYesYesMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
UtahYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyNo
VermontQuestionableFine OnlyMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
VirginiaYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
WashingtonYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyYes (9)
West VirginiaYesNoMisdemeanorMisdemeanorNo
WisconsinYesNoMisdemeanorFelonyYes
WyomingYesYesMisdemeanorFelonyNo
Footnotes:
(1)  Florida authorized licensed card rooms to offer poker limits of $2 per bet, with a limit of 3 raises per betting round, effective July 1, 2003.
(2)  Iowa permits social gambling, but only to the the extent that a player may win or lose no more than $50 or other consideration equivalent thereto in all games and activities at any one time during any period of twenty-four consecutive hours or over that entire period.  See Iowa Code 99B.12(1)(g)
(3)  Michigan has exceptions for Senior citizens homes and state fairs.
(4)  In 1999 Michigan adopted SB 562 which added Section 750.145d to the Michigan Compiled laws.  That section made it specifically unlawful to use the Internet to violate certain provisions of Michigan's anti-gambling laws (Mich. Complied Statutes 750.301 through 750.306 and 750.311.)  In 2000 Michigan adopted Public Act 185 which repealed the references in Section 750.145d to those anti-gambling sections.  Thus, Michigan is not a state that has in effect a specific prohibition against using the Internet to make, offer or accept bets over the Internet.
(5)  Missouri's felony penalty applies only to a "professional gambler" as defined.
(6)  New Jersey Senate Bill 1013 seeks to clarify definition of illegal gambling to address Internet gambling; void credit card debt incurred through illegal gambling; authorize only the State to recover illegal gambling losses and to outlaw online gambling.  Also introduced in previous legislative session as S2376.  As of July 4, 2005, S1013 has not been reported out of the New Jersey Senate Wagering, Tourism & Historic Preservation Committee.
(7)  North Dakota has a limitation of $25 per individual hand, game or event.  Betting over $25 is an infraction and it becomes a misdemeanor when the amount exceeds $500.
(8)  South Dakota's prohibition applies to those in the "gambling business."
(9)  Prohibition becomes effective June 7, 2006.

Online gambling and poker legislation in the US is changing on a state-by-state basis. New Jersey, for example, legalized online gambling and poker in November 2013, offering some hope to US players in other states for online casinos. Currently, six states offer online casino gaming and poker, while Nevada offers online poker. Check in the list above for a breakdown of other states to see the latest law updates.

Related reading: Gambling age by State.

The conclusions in the chart above are primarily based on the texts of the state criminal gambling laws, some of which are in a state of flux. We encourage readers of this website to contact us with corrections, revisions, and observations. Before you take any action in reliance on this chart, you should get up-to-date and to-the-point advice from a local attorney.

Federal Gambling Laws

Gambling in the United States has witnessed a boom in recent years. During the past decade, most states have expanded legalized gaming, including regulated casino-style games, online gaming, sports betting, and lotteries. There has also been an explosion in Native American casinos, and the popularity of online gambling in the US has increased.

Until the 1990s, casino gaming was illegal almost in every part of the continental US, except for Nevada and New Jersey. Today, 48 states have some form of legal gambling, such as casinos, bingo and poker rooms, off-track horse race betting, and more.

Understanding US gambling laws is not only important for those involved in the industry, but also for regular gamblers who want to know whether they can start a fantasy football league, a home poker game, or an NCAA tournament betting pool at the workplace.

As of this writing, a lot of things have changed in US gambling laws. What was once considered illegal on a federal level is now being made legal on a state-by-state basis. That’s provided that casino operators, and in some cases online gambling operators, apply for the necessary permits and licenses within the jurisdiction they wish to operate.

Below you’ll find links to various US Federal Gambling Laws.

Federal Actions Regarding Online Gambling

The agency of the United States government tasked with enforcing federal laws and administering justice is known as the Department of Justice (DOJ). Also referred to as the Justice Department, this sprawling wing of the federal administration is headed by the US Attorney General, a position currently served by Merrick Garland.

The DOJ, and specifically Manhattan US Attorney Preet Bharara, became household names for poker players and fans around the country on April 15th, 2011 – a day which has been dubbed “Black Friday.” On that day Bharara unsealed an indictment charging founders and key figures within the online poker industry’s three primary operators – PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker.

The indictments [United States v. Scheinberg, 10 Cr. 336 (2011)] named 11 defendants in total: Isai Scheinberg, Raymond Bitar, Scott Tom, Brent Beckley, Nelson Burtnick, Paul Tate, Ryan Lang, Bradley Franzen, Ira Rubin, Chad Elie, and John Campos. The indictment linked Scheinberg and Tate to PokerStars, Bitar, and Burtnick to Full Tilt Poker, and Tom and Beckley to Absolute Poker, while Lang, Rubin, Franzen, and Elie were named as processors of illegal payments and financial transactions.

According to the indictment, the three online poker titans were in violation of two federal laws: the Illegal Gambling Business Act of 1955 and the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act (UIGEA) of 2006.

UIGEA

UIGEA was designed to outlaw online gaming, or more accurately, to prohibit the specific deposit and payout transactions utilized by operators to allow for real-money gaming online. As stated within the act’s language, UIGEA “prohibits gambling businesses from knowingly accepting payments in connection with the participation of another person in a bet or wager that involves the use of the Internet and that is unlawful under any federal or state law.” This caused many gambling sites to stop operating in the US and gave rise to many crypto casinos operating internationally.

During the almost five-year period between the passage of UIGEA and the DOJ indictment, PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker (in addition to several other smaller operators) wilfully continued to provide online gaming services to American customers. In doing so, the “big three” necessarily made use of unlawful payment processing to facilitate their site’s operations and growth, according to the indictment. As stated by Bharara in a press release at the time:

As charged, these defendants concocted an elaborate criminal fraud scheme, alternately tricking some U.S. banks and effectively bribing others to assure the continued flow of billions in illegal gambling profits. Moreover, as we allege, in their zeal to circumvent the gambling laws, the defendants also engaged in massive money laundering and bank fraud. Foreign firms that choose to operate in the United States are not free to flout the laws they don’t like simply because they can’t bear to be parted from their profits.

American poker players suddenly found themselves in a state of limbo, as the DOJ seized the domain names for PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker. Rather than the usual log-in screen and lobby, players were suddenly greeted with an ominous white screen informing them that their favorite online poker room was effectively closed for business when it came to American customers.

Within days, all three sites decided to disallow American players to make deposits or place real-money wagers. There was an immediate rush to withdraw funds held on the sites. PokerStars began the process of returning player balances. But Full Tilt Poker found itself sinking into a much deeper quagmire due to that company’s internal controls over the use of player funds.

Full Tilt Poker owed approximately $150 million to US.customers on March 21st, 2011, while holding only $60 million in company accounts at the time. The DOJ amended its original indictment to include fraud charges. The amended complaint specifically named well-known poker players and Full Tilt Poker founders and owners Howard Lederer, Chris “Jesus” Ferguson, and Rafe Furst.

“Full Tilt was not a legitimate poker company, but a global Ponzi scheme. Full Tilt insiders lined their own pockets with funds picked from the pockets of their most loyal customers while blithely lying to both players and the public alike about the safety and security of the money deposited,” according to Bharara.

The Wire Act

While the DOJ indictment cited UIGEA (2006) and the Illegal Gambling Business Act (1955), it curiously lacked any mention of another crucial federal statute used to regulate gambling within the US. The DOJ had previously maintained that internet gambling activities, including but not limited to online poker, violated the federal Wire Act of 1961 because they were transmitted across state lines.

In 2007, then U.S. Attorney Catherine Hanaway testified in front of Congress that the Wire Act should be applicable to all forms of internet-based gambling. According to Hanaway’s testimony:

“The Department of Justice’s view is and has been for some time that all forms of Internet gambling, including sports wagering, casino games, and card games, are illegal under federal law. While many of the federal statutes do not use the term ‘Internet gambling,’ we believe that the statutory language is sufficient to cover it. As we have stated on previous occasions, the department interprets existing federal statues, including 18 U.S.C. Sections 1084, 1952, and 1955, as pertaining to and prohibiting Internet gambling.”

However, perhaps in recognition of the relatively weak statutory evidence pertaining to the Wire Act’s applicability to online gambling (it predates the industry by around 30 years), the DOJ declined to cite it in the Black Friday indictment. Months after the indictment was issued, U.S. Deputy Attorney James Cole articulated the DOJ’s new stance on the Wire Act’s relation to online gambling:

“The Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (“OLC”) has analyzed the scope of the Wire Act, 18 U.S.c § 1084, and concluded that it is limited only to sports betting,” wrote Cole.

This about-face by the DOJ helped pave the way for online poker and online casino gaming to reenter the US marketplace as a lawful, licensed, and fully regulated activity. In 2013 and 2014, three states (Nevada, New Jersey, and Delaware) legalized and regulated online gaming, although Nevada only permits online poker. They were joined in 2017 by Pennsylvania and West Virginia in 2019. Michigan and Connecticut joined the party in 2021.

In July of 2012, the U.S. government reached a settlement agreement with PokerStars, which included a provision that PokerStars would purchase fallen rival Full Tilt Poker in an effort to ensure player repayments were fully rendered. As a result of this settlement, in which both online poker operators admitted no wrongdoing, all civil complaints related to the Black Friday indictment were dismissed with prejudice. Nonetheless, several key figures within the industry, working either for online poker entities or payment processors, were later arrested and charged with crimes stemming from the original indictment.

PokerStars reentered the US market as a licensed entity in March 2016, when, under new ownership, it went live in New Jersey.

Reinterpretation of the Wire Act

The Wire Act, introduced in 1963 by Robert Kennedy, was enacted to disrupt the revenue streams of organized crime by making “betting or wagering knowingly us[ing] a wire communication” between state lines illegal.

But in the digital age, its interpretation has been a source of controversy.

The DOJ’s 2011 opinion that the Wire Act prohibited the transmission of interstate online sports betting wagers only – as opposed to online casino and poker – paved the way for state-by-state online gaming regulation. But not everyone was delighted by this.  

The late Sheldon Adelson, billionaire owner of casino giant Las Vegas Sands Corp. and a Republican mega-donor, saw online gaming as a threat to his operations. He was behind several attempts to push legislation through Congress that would have reversed the 2011 opinion and thrown the new state online gaming markets into disarray.

Known as “the Restoration of America’s Wire Act (RAWA),” the legislation was largely unsuccessful. Most lawmakers on Capitol Hill disliked the bill because they saw it as interfering with states’ rights to make their own laws about gambling, and the effort failed.    

But the Trump administration DOJ sensationally and unexpectedly overturned the 2011 opinion in late 2018, determining that the Wire Act covered all forms of gambling. This was widely thought to be a favor to Adelson who had donated hundreds of millions to Republican causes.

The New Hampshire Lottery sued the DOJ, and numerous other state lotteries that offered online gambling or digital ticket sales joined the suit. The plaintiffs argued the new opinion transgressed “the sovereign interests of the State of New Hampshire without unmistakably clear language that Congress intended such a result.”

In 2019, a federal court sided with New Hampshire, ruling it exempt from the 2018 opinion, and ordered the new interpretation to be set aside. The DOJ appealed but was unsuccessful. The subsequent Biden administration did not pursue the case, tacitly confirming it considered the 2018 opinion to be wrong.

PASPA

Sports betting and even online sports betting have exploded across the US in recent years, and it’s all down to the striking down of a federal law called PASPA.

PASPA, or the Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act, was enacted in 1992. It sought to define the legal status of sports betting across the US. Essentially, it made it illegal in every state other than four that had already made laws governing sports betting before 1992: Nevada, Delaware, Montana and Oregon.

Nevada was the only state to have full-fledged sports books, while each of the others offered some form of sports lottery.

PASPA was first tested in 2011 when New Jersey voters approved an amendment to the state constitution to allow sports betting. The state enacted the Sports Wagering Act a year later, which permitted sports books at casinos and racetracks.

The professional sports leagues sued New Jersey, arguing that sports betting threatened the integrity of their games. The legal fight lasted years and went all the way to the US Supreme Court, which in 2018 determined that PASPA was unconstitutional because it commandeered power from the states.

The floodgates opened. At the time of writing, 29 states and Washington D.C. now have some form of legal sports betting. Many offer online sportsbooks like FanDuel or DraftKings.

But wait, doesn’t the Wire Act also ban online sports betting?

It kind of does, but since PASPA was determined to have amounted to unconstitutional federal overreach, the same argument could now be used against the Wire Act as it pertains to online sports betting. Meanwhile, there appears to be little appetite within the federal government to get in the way of states’ rights to make gambling laws, not least using an anachronistic law that may no longer stand up to scrutiny.

Unlike the Wire Act, sports betting is no longer on shaky ground in America.  

Additional Federal Statutes That Apply to Gambling


Gambling on Cruises: US Gambling Ship Act

Federal Travel Act: Scope & Practices

Wagering Paraphernalia Act

Illegal Gambling Businesses

Rico Act of 1970

Interstate Wagering Amendment of 1994

Money Transmitters

Transportation of Gambling Devices Act of 1951

Bank Records and Foreign Transaction Act of 1970

Money Laundering Control Act of 1986

Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986

References

Federal

Federal Judicial Decisions

Other References

Stay Ahead of the Game

Are you ready to take your online gambling experience to the next level? Sign up for the LetsGambleUSA newsletter and get the latest news, exclusive offers, and expert tips delivered straight to your inbox.