Maverick Gaming is a gaming and entertainment company headquartered in Kirkland, Washington, employing a total of more than 4,000 people throughout the organization. 2,000+ people of the Maverick Gaming team are in Washington where Maverick Gaming is proud to be the largest private employer of Teamsters Local 117 in the state.
On January 11, 2022, we filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. In summary, we are challenging an erroneous application of a federal law called the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) that is being relied upon to give tribes exclusive rights to certain types of gaming that are not allowed in non-tribal commercial gaming properties in Washington. We support and respect IGRA and its aim of supporting tribal equality and sovereignty. But IGRA was intended to guarantee parity between tribal and non-tribal gaming. In Washington, however, the law is being used to insulate tribes against competition and has created tribal monopolies for certain types of gaming, contrary to IGRA’s own words.
Maverick Gaming, headquartered in Kirkland, WA, is striving to establish a first-class option for hospitality and entertainment everywhere it operates. Currently that includes facilities in Nevada, Colorado, and Washington.
Our Washington properties face a unique barrier when it comes to offerings for our customers because of Washington State’s erroneous application of a federal law called the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA) passed by Congress in 1988. IGRA was crafted to prevent discrimination between tribal and non-tribal gaming and to ensure tribes were not kept from opportunity. It established a federal framework governing gaming on Indian lands that would guarantee parity between tribal and non-tribal gaming. Its aim was to give tribes the opportunity to engage in all forms of gaming that the state permits for non-tribal entities. Washington State’s application of IGRA, however, flips the law on its head by using it to establish tribal gaming monopolies, thereby contradicting both the statute’s text and its primary objective.