- Maine’s governor has shelved an iGaming expansion bill that would give tribes exclusive online casino rights until at least 2026.
- Massachusetts lawmakers held a hearing in June, but the upcoming iLottery launch and ongoing tribal tensions have slowed progress.
- Ohio faces fractured support, industry pushback, and gubernatorial resistance, making iCasino legislation unlikely to pass this year.
BOSTON – Three states are at pivotal moments in the push to legalize online casino gaming. While bills have been introduced and debated, political delays, regulatory caution, and industry opposition have each played unique roles in shaping the uncertain road ahead.
Tribes Wait as Governor Mills Pauses iGaming
Maine’s attempt to expand online gambling through tribal exclusivity has stalled… for now.
Gov. Janet Mills has chosen not to act on LD 1164, a bill that would allow Maine’s Wabanaki Nations to offer online casino games like blackjack and poker. The bill cleared the Legislature, but with the session adjourned, Mills is holding it until lawmakers return in 2026.
The bill is controversial: tribal leaders argue it brings economic empowerment, while critics, including the state’s two casinos and the Mills administration, oppose the exclusivity and fear increased gambling addiction.
A decision likely won’t come before next year, when Mills has the power to veto it or let it through without a signature, a move similar to how Maine sports betting came into play.
Old News: Override Of Vetoed ME Sports Betting Bill Delayed By Absences
Massachusetts Considerations Amid Competing Interests
Massachusetts lawmakers are evaluating two online casino bills, HB 332 and SB 235, but progress has been slow. A public hearing was held in June, and both proposals offer strict licensing rules, $5 million operator fees, and a 20% tax rate.
Provisions include consumer protections, responsible gaming programs, and the potential for multistate online poker. However, the iLottery’s upcoming 2026 launch complicates the effort, as online lottery interests typically resist competition from iCasino.
Additionally, the cautious gambling expansion of Massachusetts online sports betting in the past and ongoing tribal casino issues (e.g., Mashpee Wampanoag’s stalled Taunton project) mean real momentum remains uncertain for the rest of 2025.
Ohio’s Opposition Likely Dooms 2025 Effort
Ohio’s online casino legalization push appears fractured and unlikely to succeed in 2025.
Two competing bills, HB 298 and SB 197, differ in tax rates, licensing renewals, and provisions for sweepstakes and lottery gaming.
While both aim to legalize iGaming, their sponsors and industry stakeholders are not aligned. Further, church leaders in Ohio has voiced their clear opposition to the expansion.
Major in-state operators like JACK Entertainment and Churchill Downs have voiced opposition, and even supporters have reservations. Meanwhile, Gov. Mike DeWine has a track record of restricting gambling growth, having already doubled the online sportsbook tax rate.
Without unity among lawmakers and operators, this Ohio betting measure appears more like a placeholder than a passable bill.
