Churchill Downs Prevails in Michigan Legal Battle

Churchill Downs Inc. has won its legal battle against the Michigan Gaming Control Board (MGCB).

Updated on 8 January 2026

Details of Judge Jarbou’s Ruling

U.S. District Judge for the Western District of Michigan Hala Y. Jarbou delivered her decision on Tuesday. It permanently blocks the regulator from enforcing a state licensing rule that required TwinSpires, CDI’s advance-deposit wagering platform (ADW), to partner with an in-state racetrack to offer online wagering to Michigan bettors on races taking place in other states.

The last operational racetrack in Michigan, Northville Downs, had its license lapse in late 2024 for several weeks. The MGCB directed ADW platforms to cease taking bets from residents, as no active racetracks were available for partnership.

TwinSpires continued operating during this window, which led to the regulator suspending its ADW license in January 2025. TwinSpires commenced legal action and got a temporary injunction to continue running its offering.

Judge Jarbou ruled on Jan. 6, 2026 that TwinSpires can conduct its operations without an in-state partnership or licensing agreement. The plaintiff successfully argued that the federal Interstate Horseracing Act (IHA)’s consent rules preempt Michigan’s requirement. Michigan’s effective veto over interstate betting conflicted with the federal framework.

Ruling Could Impact Other States

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit already ruled Michigan’s requirement unlawful in December, affirming a federal court’s preliminary injunction from February.

The MGCB appealed the decisions before Judge Jarbou delivered her ruling on Tuesday, which made the injunction permanent.

TwinSpires can continue normal operations in Michigan after the ruling that state regulators can’t interfere with interstate wagering. The MGCB has the option to appeal this latest decision to a federal appeals court.

Industry observers believe that this case could have a knock-on impact on racetracks, purses, and regulators in other states. For example, the frameworks in Arizona and California are quite similar to those in Michigan. Stakeholders will be watching closely to see if the MGCB takes further legal action.