In a somewhat surprising development, Oklahoma Governor Kevin Stitt (pictured) has vetoed anti-sweeps bill SB 1589 despite it passing comfortably through both chambers.
The proposal passed the Senate 48-0 in March, then the House earlier this month with a vote of 65-21. However, Stitt quashed the bill this week, offering his reasons in the official veto message:
“Oklahoma’s gaming laws must be clear, targeted, and fair. Senate Bill 1589 does not accomplish that end. This bill is so broad that it criminalizes everyday apps people use for fun. It also unnecessarily creates a new felony and extends criminal liability to businesses and service providers.”
This is only the second veto of an anti-sweeps bill, and the first since Governor Jeff Landry’s denied SB 181 in Louisiana last year.
Stitt didn’t defend sweepstakes casinos directly but did acknowledge that these apps are enjoyed by Oklahoma residents. His objection seems more libertarian and pro-business, mainly looking to avoid overreach and criminal exposure for third parties (the supply chain would have been implicated). Still, the rejection will be celebrated by the sweeps industry as a rare legislative win.
Almost all sweeps brands do business in Oklahoma currently, making it one of the least restricted states in the country, and the veto’s effect will be that sites like McLuck, Stake.us, and WOW Vegas can continue operating.
The bill would have designated “dual-currency” casino operation as a Class C2 felony offense, with modest financial penalties attached, but also the possibility of imprisonment.
So it’s still the case that only two anti-sweeps bills have passed this year – in Indiana and Maine – but Tennessee and Louisiana have similar bills waiting for a decision from their respective Governors.
In terms of proposals still under consideration in the legislature, we can count Minnesota and Washington D.C., although MN’s 2026 session ends in only a few days’ time, so time is of the essence there.
Iowa is also waiting for the Governor’s decision on a bill which would allow the state gaming regulator to send cease-and-desist letters to sweepstakes operators.
Author: Bogdan Lunkan
Updated:
