The civil action, filed on August 29, 2025, accuses Stake.us and several suppliers of running illegal gambling. Around the same time, a bill called AB 831 advanced in the state legislature.
That bill would make it a crime for companies to “knowingly” support sweepstakes casinos. In response, Pragmatic Play went further and ended all U.S. sweepstakes supply. Evolution’s pullback is focused on California for now. Stake says it has not been served and denies the claims.
Why the Suppliers Left California
The Los Angeles City Attorney filed a civil enforcement case against Stake.us and a list of game suppliers, including Evolution and Pragmatic. The complaint argues that the site’s sweepstakes model acts like illegal online gambling under state law.
It also names Evolution’s studios, such as NetEnt and Red Tiger, as defendants. Another supplier, Hacksaw Gaming, has also removed its content in the state.
This legal push is happening alongside AB 831, a bill aimed at shutting down sweepstakes casinos in California. The bill targets anyone who knowingly supports these platforms such as payment firms, platform providers, and game suppliers. That single word, “knowingly,” was added in an amendment, but the risk remains.
Suppliers with big regulated U.S. casino ambitions do not want to jeopardize licenses elsewhere. Pulling content from California reduces the chance of being seen as aiding an unlicensed operator.
Pragmatic Play then chose a wider move: it stopped supplying all U.S. sweepstakes casinos. A company spokesperson said the decision followed “regulatory developments and evolving legislation.” That message signals a focus on compliance and may hint at future efforts in the licensed U.S. iCasino market.
Evolution, by contrast, has so far acted only in California, where the lawsuit was filed.
Stake, for its part, says it hasn’t been served yet. The company rejects the media allegations and plans to defend itself. Until the case proceeds, California players will notice fewer games available on Stake.us.
What This Means for Players and the Wider Market
For California users, the change is simple: fewer slots, fewer table games, and less variety. Titles from Evolution and Pragmatic are gone, which means popular live tables and top slots have disappeared. If you don’t see favorite titles, this lawsuit and AB 831 are likely why.
For the industry, the signal is bigger. Regulators may be focusing on suppliers as a choke point. If content creators pull back, sweepstakes casinos quickly lose depth. That can drive players to other sites with different libraries, or back to free-play only experiences. It may also push operators to add more in-house or smaller-studio games, at least in the short term.
Expect further ripple effects. Other states could mirror California if lawmakers see this as a workable model. More suppliers might pause or narrow their U.S. sweepstakes exposure to manage risk. On the flip side, if AB 831 stalls or the lawsuit weakens, some content could return though many firms will still weigh reputation first.
The near-term takeaway: California’s sweepstakes scene is in flux. The legal fight will shape what players can access, how suppliers operate, and where operators invest next. For now, Californians should plan on slimmer libraries and watch how AB 831 and the LA case advance.
