State guidesUpdated
US State Guides & Sweepstakes Casino Location Rules
Changed Sweepstakes rules across the US, California, State-Law Articles & Location Notes, Dates and missing evidence, State Guide Questions.
Sweepstakes rules across the USView before & after
Previously
15 Reported in published introductions
Now
4 Reported in published introductions
CaliforniaView before & after
Previously
California's chaptered AB 831 makes dual-currency online sweepstakes games unlawful to operate or knowingly support, and this is general information, not legal advice.
Now
California prohibits covered online sweepstakes games under AB 831, effective January 1, 2026. Ordinary promotional contests are subject to separate limits.
State-Law Articles & Location NotesView before & after
Previously
Alabama (AL) Further checks needed Alabama has no sweepstakes-casino statute we could fetch for 2025 or 2026; an older attorney general release targeted a different sweepstakes site, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Alaska (AK) Further checks needed We did not fetch an Alaska statute that names sweepstakes casinos, so this note sticks to the dual-currency model and what players should check, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Arizona (AZ) Restrictions noted Arizona's gaming department published a free-entry test for sweepstakes-style games and a June 2025 cease-and-desist list that names sweepstakes operators, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Arkansas (AR) Further checks needed Arkansas HB 1861, titled around illegal online casinos, was withdrawn by its sponsor and is not a sweepstakes ban we can cite as law, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide California (CA) Restrictions noted California's chaptered AB 831 makes dual-currency online sweepstakes games unlawful to operate or knowingly support, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Colorado (CO) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Colorado statute that classifies dual-currency sweepstakes casinos, so this note stays with the model and the checks a player can actually do, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Connecticut (CT) Further checks needed Connecticut's compiled sweepstakes statute bars unlicensed online casino-style sweepstakes, and the legislature's bill summary dates that change to October 1, 2025. This is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Delaware (DE) Restrictions noted We did not fetch a Delaware order that names sweepstakes casinos; operators commonly block the state, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Florida (FL) Restrictions noted Florida's attorney general sued major sweepstakes-casino operators in August 2026 over a dual-currency model, and this is general information about that filing, not legal advice. View Guide Georgia (GA) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Georgia opinion that decides dual-currency sweepstakes casinos, so this note stays with the model and the checks on the site in front of you, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Hawaii (HI) Further checks needed Hawaii SB 3281, titled as a gambling-enforcement measure, was deferred in committee and is not a ban we can cite as law, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Idaho (ID) Further checks needed Idaho's constitution bars casino gambling and allows only narrow merchant promotions without consideration, and this is general information from the text we fetched, not legal advice. View Guide Illinois (IL) Restrictions noted The Illinois Gaming Board has sent cease-and-desist letters calling online sweepstakes casinos illegal, including a February 2026 letter to Stake.us, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Indiana (IN) Restrictions noted We could not read an enacted Indiana sweepstakes-casino statute from the legislature site, operators commonly block the state, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Iowa (IA) Restrictions noted Iowa's enrolled Senate File 2289 lets the racing and gaming commission pursue illegal sweepstakes with cease-and-desist orders, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Kansas (KS) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Kansas statute that classifies dual-currency sweepstakes casinos, so this note sticks to the model and the site rules, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Kentucky (KY) Further checks needed Kentucky's attorney general filed a complaint against VGW over dual-currency casino sites, and the case is an allegation rather than a judgment. This is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Louisiana (LA) Further checks needed Louisiana Act 182, from HB 883, folds dual-currency online casino simulations into gambling by computer, with a status-page effective date of August 1, 2026. This is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Maine (ME) Further checks needed Maine's governor signed LD 2007 on April 6, 2026, as Chapter 645, prohibiting online sweepstakes games that use dual currency. This is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Maryland (MD) Further checks needed Maryland HB 295 would address interactive games, but the status line we fetched still showed a Senate hearing, not an enactment. This is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Massachusetts (MA) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Massachusetts statute that names sweepstakes casinos, so this note stays with the dual-currency model and the rules on the site, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Michigan (MI) Restrictions noted Michigan's gaming board published a September 2025 notice ordering more illegal online casinos to exit, operators commonly block the state, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Minnesota (MN) Further checks needed Minnesota's attorney general announced November 2025 letters to sweepstakes casinos over redeemable sweeps coins, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Mississippi (MS) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Mississippi order that names sweepstakes casinos, so this note stays with the dual-currency model and the rules on the site, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Missouri (MO) Further checks needed We did not fetch a Missouri order aimed at dual-currency sweepstakes casinos, so this note stays with the model and the site rules, and it is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Montana (MT) Further checks needed Montana SB 555 revises internet gambling to cover online casinos that take any form of currency, and this is general information from the bill text we fetched, not legal advice. View Guide Nebraska (NE) Further checks needed Nebraska's gambling statute defines bets and prize contests, and it does not name dual-currency online casinos, so this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Nevada (NV) Restrictions noted Nevada's gaming chapter does not use the word sweepstakes, operators we checked block the state, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide New Hampshire (NH) Further checks needed We did not fetch a New Hampshire statute that names dual-currency casinos, so this note sticks to the model and the operator terms we actually read. View Guide New Jersey (NJ) Restrictions noted New Jersey's chaptered A5447, approved August 15, 2025, targets pay-to-play sweepstakes including dual-currency prizes, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide New Mexico (NM) Further checks needed The New Mexico Gaming Control Board's FAQ discusses promotional sweepstakes and says the state does not endorse internet gambling, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide New York (NY) Restrictions noted New York chaptered S5935A on December 5, 2025, after the Attorney General moved against sweepstakes casinos, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide North Carolina (NC) Further checks needed North Carolina's G.S. 14-306.4 bans sweepstakes on electronic machines the sponsor possesses, and whether a remote phone app is that device is not settled on the page we read. View Guide North Dakota (ND) Further checks needed North Dakota's criminal code defines gambling as risking value on chance and does not name dual-currency casinos, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Ohio (OH) Further checks needed Ohio's Revised Code restricts sweepstakes terminal devices at facilities, and we did not fetch a separate enacted ban on remote dual-currency sites. View Guide Oklahoma (OK) Further checks needed Oklahoma SB 1589, veto overridden on May 14, 2026, takes effect November 1, 2026 and covers dual-currency online casino games, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Oregon (OR) Further checks needed Oregon's criminal code index lists an internet-gambling offense, and we did not download the section text, so this is general information, not a reading of ORS 167.109. View Guide Pennsylvania (PA) Restrictions noted We did not find sweepstakes casinos on the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board homepage we fetched, and one operator's terms already exclude the state. View Guide Rhode Island (RI) Restrictions noted A 2026 Rhode Island gambling bill we fetched does not mention sweepstakes, and one operator's terms already exclude the state. View Guide South Carolina (SC) Further checks needed The South Carolina gambling bill we fetched is a skill-game clarification still in committee on that page, not a dual-currency casino statute. View Guide South Dakota (SD) Further checks needed The South Dakota legislature page we fetched did not return statute text, so this note does not invent a local sweeps citation. View Guide Tennessee (TN) Further checks needed Tennessee Public Chapter 1117, signed in 2026 and effective when it became law, prohibits dual-currency online sweepstakes games, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide Texas (TX) Further checks needed The Texas statutes page we fetched did not include Penal Code chapter 47's operative text, so this note does not invent a local citation. View Guide Utah (UT) Further checks needed We could not download Utah's criminal code in this pass, so this note does not cite a Utah sweeps statute or an effective date. View Guide Vermont (VT) Further checks needed Vermont's 2026 casino-gaming bill was only referred to committee on the status page we fetched, and one operator already excludes the state. View Guide Virginia (VA) Further checks needed The Virginia bill page we fetched did not return bill text, and the operator terms we read do not name the state. View Guide Washington (WA) Restrictions noted Washington's RCW 9.46.240 makes transmitting gambling information by internet a class C felony outside authorized gambling, and operators we checked block the state. View Guide West Virginia (WV) Restrictions noted The West Virginia code page we opened did not include the section text, and both operator terms we read exclude the state. View Guide Wisconsin (WI) Further checks needed Wisconsin's lottery definition turns on consideration, and the statute lists sweepstakes steps that are not consideration, without naming dual-currency casinos. View Guide Wyoming (WY) Further checks needed Wyoming's 2026 Enrolled Act 38 tightens the private social-gambling exception and does not name dual-currency casinos, and this is general information, not legal advice. View Guide
Now
Alabama (AL) Further checks needed An Alabama enforcement case addressed illegal sweepstakes games in 2017. It is historical evidence, not a current approval or a blanket ruling on every dual-currency site. View Guide Alaska (AK) Further checks needed Alaska defines gambling by the risk of something of value on a chance-based outcome. Free entry and promotional terminology do not alone establish an exception. View Guide Arizona (AZ) Further checks needed Arizona applies a strict free-entry standard to sweepstakes-style games. The Department of Gaming warns that some free-to-play products promote illegal gambling. View Guide Arkansas (AR) Further checks needed Arkansas gambling-device rules remain relevant to casino-style promotions. HB 1861 was withdrawn in April 2025 and should not be described as an enacted online-gaming law. View Guide California (CA) Further checks needed California prohibits covered online sweepstakes games under AB 831, effective January 1, 2026. Ordinary promotional contests are subject to separate limits. View Guide Colorado (CO) Further checks needed Colorado’s gambling definition addresses risking value on chance-based outcomes and includes limited exclusions. Commercial promotional casinos need their own assessment. View Guide Connecticut (CT) Further checks needed Connecticut restricts sweepstakes using simulated gambling devices and online casino gaming. A sweepstakes label does not replace required licensing. View Guide Delaware (DE) Further checks needed Delaware distinguishes prohibited gambling activity from specifically authorized state-controlled games. An online sweepstakes brand cannot rely on another product’s authorization. View Guide Florida (FL) Further checks needed Florida’s game-promotion statute sets conditions for promotions incidental to consumer products or services. It does not generally authorize dual-currency casinos. View Guide Georgia (GA) Further checks needed Georgia’s gambling-device definition covers chance-based awards of value. Its Attorney General has explained that a small merchandise prize does not automatically make a slot-style device lawful. View Guide Hawaii (HI) Further checks needed Hawaii’s gambling definition includes risking value on contests materially influenced by chance. A redeemable token can count as value even when no cash bet is named. View Guide Idaho (ID) Further checks needed Idaho’s gambling definition covers risking money, credit or other value on chance-based gain, including casino games. A sweepstakes label alone does not establish an exception. View Guide Illinois (IL) Further checks needed Illinois generally prohibits playing games of chance or skill for money or value unless an exception applies. Check the applicable authorization and current restrictions. View Guide Indiana (IN) Further checks needed Indiana established civil penalties for conducting online sweepstakes casino games under HB 1052, with enforcement fines beginning July 1, 2026. View Guide Iowa (IA) Further checks needed Iowa’s 2026 legislation expressly includes illegal sweepstakes in the regulator’s enforcement powers. Authorization must be established separately from a casino’s marketing. View Guide Kansas (KS) Further checks needed Kansas defines bets, lotteries, consideration and gambling devices separately. A free-entry promotion must be evaluated under the complete rules, not just its label. View Guide Kentucky (KY) Further checks needed Kentucky’s Chapter 528 definitions distinguish players, gambling activity and devices. A promotional casino’s availability statement does not establish its legal status. View Guide Louisiana (LA) Further checks needed Louisiana’s 2026 Act 182 expressly addresses internet games using dual currency exchangeable for prizes within its gambling-by-computer definition. View Guide Maine (ME) Further checks needed Maine prohibits operating, promoting or supporting covered online sweepstakes games under Chapter 38. The 2026 law includes civil fines and licensing consequences. View Guide Maryland (MD) Further checks needed Maryland regulates prize promotions and gambling separately. The HB 295 record must be read as legislative history, not assumed to be an enacted casino authorization. View Guide Massachusetts (MA) Restrictions noted Massachusetts addresses unlawful gambling and deceptive sweepstakes under separate rules. Promotional terminology does not establish that a casino-style prize game is sanctioned. View Guide Michigan (MI) Further checks needed Michigan’s regulator warns against unlicensed online casinos and maintains an authorized-operator list. Confirm licensing rather than relying on a sweepstakes label. View Guide Minnesota (MN) Further checks needed Minnesota defines lotteries through prize, chance and consideration. Its in-package promotion exception has several conditions beyond a no-purchase statement. View Guide Mississippi (MS) Further checks needed Mississippi restricts wagering under its gambling chapter. The 2026 SB 2104 proposal failed in committee and did not become an enacted sweepstakes ban. View Guide Missouri (MO) Further checks needed Missouri’s gambling definitions examine chance, value and the operator’s role. Its published statute does not grant blanket approval to dual-currency casino brands. View Guide Montana (MT) Further checks needed Montana permits only public gambling specifically authorized by statute or rule. Its regulator’s license list is not approval for an unrelated sweepstakes casino. View Guide Nebraska (NE) Further checks needed Nebraska defines gambling and things of value in § 28-1101. Its prize-contest exception has specific conditions and does not approve every promotional casino. View Guide Nevada (NV) Further checks needed Nevada regulates gambling through Chapter 463 licensing. Operating a promotional casino requires scrutiny of the actual game and authorization, not reliance on free-entry advertising. View Guide New Hampshire (NH) Further checks needed New Hampshire’s gambling-machine definition expressly includes equipment used for sweepstakes or chance games with exchangeable awards. Specific exceptions need to be checked. View Guide New Jersey (NJ) Restrictions noted New Jersey treats pay-to-play sweepstakes as unlawful gambling unless statutory conditions or another authorization apply. Its exceptions exclude certain coins and online credits. View Guide New Mexico (NM) Further checks needed New Mexico defines bets and gambling devices in its criminal gambling provisions. A site accepting New Mexico players is not proof that its prize model is authorized. View Guide New York (NY) Further checks needed New York’s Attorney General ordered 26 online sweepstakes platforms to stop prohibited gambling activity in June 2025, including sales of redeemable virtual coins. View Guide North Carolina (NC) Further checks needed North Carolina prohibits operating electronic sweepstakes through entertaining displays under G.S. 14-306.4, with a specific exception for lawful compact activities. View Guide North Dakota (ND) Further checks needed North Dakota defines gambling through risking value for chance-dependent gain. Its exclusions concern specified lawful activities rather than general sweepstakes-casino approval. View Guide Ohio (OH) Further checks needed Ohio’s scheme-of-chance definition includes indirect consideration and electronic prize reveals. Selling another product alongside game entries does not automatically avoid gambling rules. View Guide Oklahoma (OK) Further checks needed Oklahoma enacted SB 1589 in 2026 to amend its gambling offense and definitions. Review the enacted text and effective-date provisions for the actual product. View Guide Oregon (OR) Further checks needed Oregon’s gambling chapter defines chance games and casino formats and distinguishes authorized lottery activity. A promotional label does not grant a casino license. View Guide Pennsylvania (PA) Restrictions noted Pennsylvania’s lottery statute distinguishes unlawful schemes from activity specifically authorized by law. A sweepstakes casino must establish its own authorization. View Guide Rhode Island (RI) Further checks needed Rhode Island prohibits specified lottery and chance-game operations except where authorized. Authorized gaming categories do not automatically cover dual-currency casinos. View Guide South Carolina (SC) Further checks needed South Carolina’s gambling chapter addresses gaming, wagering and related premises. An online casino’s eligibility list cannot substitute for the state-law analysis. View Guide South Dakota (SD) Further checks needed South Dakota has a specific internet-gambling chapter. Its location and business restrictions must be read with applicable statutory exceptions. View Guide Tennessee (TN) Restrictions noted Tennessee’s 2026 Public Chapter 1117 expressly addresses unlawful online sweepstakes games and expands enforcement authority. Check the enacted product definition. View Guide Texas (TX) Further checks needed Texas Penal Code Chapter 47 governs gambling. Its definitions and defenses require scrutiny of a casino’s actual mechanics; free entry alone is not a statewide approval. View Guide Utah (UT) Further checks needed Utah expressly prohibits covered gambling and online gambling. A promotional-currency model must not be presented as an automatic exception. View Guide Vermont (VT) Further checks needed Vermont’s statute addresses winning or losing money or value through games and wagers. Promotional casino claims must be assessed against the actual prize model. View Guide Virginia (VA) Further checks needed Virginia’s gambling definitions cover value exchanged for uncertain outcomes and include skill-game provisions. Promotional labels do not establish an exemption. View Guide Washington (WA) Further checks needed Washington restricts transmitting gambling information online except for authorized activities. Its statutory exceptions do not provide general approval for sweepstakes casinos. View Guide West Virginia (WV) Further checks needed West Virginia’s Interactive Wagering Act authorizes online wagering only under its statutory framework. A promotional label does not establish authorization. View Guide Wisconsin (WI) Further checks needed Wisconsin’s gambling definition includes a chance-dependent bargain to win or lose value, even where skill is also involved. Check the specific statutory exceptions. View Guide Wyoming (WY) Further checks needed Wyoming’s gambling chapter distinguishes defined exceptions and occasional business promotions. Those limits should not be treated as a blanket permit for ongoing casino play. View Guide
Dates and missing evidenceView before & after
Previously
The article date identifies its supplied research notes. A guide that reports a missing source or unresolved issue keeps that uncertainty visible.
Now
The review date identifies when the cited material was checked. Read the source’s date and scope before treating a historical action as a current rule.
State Guide QuestionsView before & after
Previously
Dates and article text come from our published Sanity records. Read the operator’s current terms alongside the article; the directory is not a live eligibility check.
Now
Dates identify the article’s publication and substantive updates. Read the operator’s current terms alongside the article; the directory is not a live eligibility check.