Wyoming / Legal position gauge

Moderate risk

Editorial assessment from Wyoming-specific research—not legal approval. Licensed Wyoming counsel must review before any deployment decision.

Why this rating?

Wyoming defines gambling as “risking any property for gain contingent in whole or in part upon lot or chance in any game played with cards, dice, balls or on any gambling device or contingent on the happening or outcome of an event … over which the person taking a risk has no control” (Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-101(a)(iii), current as of July 1, 2026). That is an any-chance test, not predominance. Formal Opinion 2018-001 examined Banilla terminals programmed to yield predetermined amounts on each spin and concluded they were illegal gambling devices; players were gambling and providers were engaged in professional gambling. The Wyoming Supreme Court has treated predetermined pickle-card pools as chance games and warned that the law is not required to be blind to ingenuity that recasts gambling (37 Gambling Devices; FOE Sheridan). Aiding or inducing gambling for profit is a felony (§ 6-7-102(b)); devices, records, and proceeds are seizable, and a place where a device is found is presumed a professional-gambling premise (§ 6-7-101(a)(iv)–(v); § 6-7-103). Licensed skill-based amusement games exist only where player skill is the primary factor—not inherent chance—and only under Title 11 caps and location rules (§ 11-25-102(a)(xix); § 11-25-303). The Gaming Commission has said unlicensed sweepstakes and iGaming sites are operating illegally (May 22, 2025). No reported Wyoming decision has tested mandatory pre-reveal with exact monetary disclosure, genuine accept/decline, and no charge on decline. That timing distinction, plus the absence of any case against a full-pool reveal with mandatory pre-reveal, drops the rating from elevated to moderate. Formal Opinion 2018-001 tested Banilla pay-then-spin terminals with predetermined amounts—not a mandatory full-pool reveal. The any-chance definition and felony professional-gambling statute keep the rating out of the unsettled band.

This gauge also weighs that we identified no charges and no decided case in Wyoming against a game that used a full-pool reveal together with mandatory pre-reveal. Banilla, Torch, and JD Prime used an optional viewer of the next assigned result after money was already on the machine. Café terminals paid first, then revealed. Those fact patterns are not this architecture and do not, by themselves, set the rating.

Scale: High risk → Elevated risk → Moderate risk → Unsettled → Moderately favorable → Favorable → Strong position. These are editorial categories, not probabilities of approval or findings of legality.

Source review date: . Has this exact model been tested? · Counsel checklist · Authorities

NCG GAMESWyoming position brief
Wyoming  /  Position brief

The Attorney General already faced predetermined reels.
Chance “in whole or in part” was enough.

In Formal Opinion 2018-001, Wyoming’s Attorney General examined Banilla terminals programmed to yield predetermined amounts on each spin—some of them predetermined losers—and still called them illegal gambling devices. The Supreme Court had already treated predetermined pickle-card pools as chance, not raffles. The NCG position is that those authorities tested payment before the result was known. They did not test a transaction that discloses the exact monetary result before the player can commit funds.

Has this been tested? What remains for Wyoming counsel
Working position

This brief analyzes the proposed transaction architecture under current Wyoming law. It is not a finding of legality, Gaming Commission approval, or authorization to operate cash-prize devices. Professional gambling—aiding or inducing gambling with intent to derive a profit—is a felony. Authorized channels include licensed skill-based amusement games, lottery games run by the Wyoming Lottery Corporation, Gaming Commission activities under Title 11 (including historic horse racing), online sports wagering, fantasy sports, and the other statutory exclusions in § 6-7-101(a)(iii).

Wyoming legal starting point

Wyoming criminalizes gambling and, more severely, professional gambling. Devices, records, and proceeds used in professional gambling are subject to seizure.

Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-101(a)(iii)

Chance “in whole or in part”—or an event the player does not control

Current text (July 1, 2026) reaches gain “contingent in whole or in part upon lot or chance in any game played with cards, dice, balls or on any gambling device” or contingent on an event over which the person taking the risk has no control. Older cases and the 2018 opinion quoted the prior phrasing—“lot, chance, the operation of a gambling device.” Either wording is an any-chance test. A skill argument does not, by itself, take paid prize play outside the definition.

§§ 6-7-101(a)(iv), 6-7-103

A device used in professional gambling is a gambling device

A gambling device is equipment “used or usable in the playing phases of any professional gambling activity,” including “gambling by a person involving the playing of a machine.” Antique display slots are excepted. Any place where a gambling device is found is presumed intended for professional gambling. Devices, records, and proceeds are seizable.

§§ 6-7-101(a)(iii), 6-7-102

Unlawful unless excluded or licensed

Exclusions include bona fide skill contests (expressly not skill-based amusement games), bona fide business transactions valid under contract law, social play meeting the 2026 private-relationship limits, charitable bingo/pull tabs/raffles, the state lottery, and activities the Gaming Commission authorizes under Title 11. Gambling is a misdemeanor; professional gambling is a felony (up to three years and $3,000).

Central timing question: § 6-7-101(a)(iii) asks whether the player is risking property for gain contingent on chance or on an uncontrolled event. The NCG position is that at Accept the monetary result is already fixed and disclosed—so the player is not risking property for an unresolved contingent gain. Wyoming has not held whether that sequence escapes the definition, and Formal Opinion 2018-001 treated predetermined machine payouts as gambling when customers paid before learning the result.

Safeguard 1

Exact cost and result are known before acceptance.

Before the player becomes financially committed to a transaction, the system discloses the exact transaction cost and exact monetary result. Accept processes only those disclosed terms.

Why this matters under Wyoming law

§ 6-7-101(a)(iii) requires risking property for gain contingent in whole or in part on chance or an uncontrolled event. If the economic outcome is already fixed and disclosed before Accept, the strongest NCG argument is that the player is not risking property for a contingent gain—they are accepting a disclosed, predetermined transaction whose result is already known.

Contrary authority

Formal Opinion 2018-001 players paid and then received a programmed result. The Attorney General did not treat predetermination of the spin amount as removing chance. 37 Gambling Devices purchasers paid for pickle cards and then pulled tabs to reveal predetermined symbols. Prosecutors will argue casino-style presentation still frames each session as a game whose gain depends on chance in whole or in part.

Implementation risk

Weakening factors: showing cost/result after partial payment, allowing acceptance before disclosure renders, or mismatch between displayed and settled amounts. Any of those would collapse the timing distinction from Opinion 2018-001 and 37 Gambling Devices.

Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-101(a)(iii)Timing of the risk is critical
Safeguard 2

Viewing the offer does not require payment.

The player may see the disclosed offer—including zero or negative-net outcomes—without paying for that transaction. Declining imposes no charge for that offer.

Why timing of consideration matters

Opinion 2018-001 and 37 Gambling Devices involved payment before the result was known. NCG separates inspection from commitment: no property is risked for a declined offer. That is the factual distinction those authorities did not have. Title 40’s prize-notice statute requires a written prize notice before a solicitor may request payment for a represented prize—an analogy, not an authorization.

Contrary authority

Prosecutors may argue the player risked property by funding a balance that will draw unknown future offers, and that each Accept still “risks” credits. The Gaming Commission’s May 2025 warning treats unlicensed sweepstakes and social-casino sites that offer real-money payouts as operating illegally—labels and “no purchase necessary” framing have not moved the regulator.

Formal Op. 2018-001No payment on decline
Safeguard 3

Monetary results and reel positions are predetermined.

Monetary outcomes are fixed before acceptance within a finite predetermined pool. Reels, symbols, and entertainment layers cannot modify the disclosed monetary result after acceptance.

Distinction from Wyoming authorities

Opinion 2018-001 treated programmed, predetermined spin amounts as a fact that supported the gambling conclusion—the house would keep a share; some spins could not be won. 37 Gambling Devices treated a finite pickle-card deal with predetermined winners the same way. NCG’s distinction is not predetermination alone—it is predetermination plus disclosure before financial commitment plus a free decline.

Skill-path problem

A Title 11 skill-based amusement game requires that bona fide player skill, rather than any inherent element of chance, be the primary factor in determining the outcome. A finite pool assigned by software is the opposite of player-determined outcome. § 6-7-101(a)(iii)(A) now says the bona fide skill-contest exclusion “shall not include skill based amusement games.” Cash-prize NCG play cannot be forced into either skill door.

Device and reel presentation

Wyoming Downs held Instant Racing terminals were gambling devices the then-pari-mutuel commission could not authorize by rule; the Legislature later created an express historic-horse-racing path. FOE Sheridan held Fast Action Bingo machines were gambling devices despite a bingo label. Wyoming courts look at how the machine is used, not what it is called. Casino-style cabinets will invite the same common-sense inquiry the Court quoted in 37 Gambling Devices: the law is not required to be blind to ingenuity.

37 Gambling DevicesWyoming Downs
Safeguard 4

The player may stop and redeem—including cents.

Eligible remaining credits may be redeemed without further play. Redemption includes fractional dollars; balances are not rounded down to trap value in the machine.

Effect on Wyoming analysis

Full redemption supports the argument that only accepted transactions consume value and that the player retains a genuine exit. It may mitigate “trapped balance” or forced-continued-play theories. Opinion 2018-001 still treated Banilla payouts—and the house keep—as gambling mechanics; redemption of winnings did not appear as a defense.

Limitation

Redemption does not cure an otherwise unlawful gambling transaction. Peace officers may seize gambling devices, records, and proceeds (§ 6-7-103). A location where a device is found is presumed a professional-gambling premise (§ 6-7-101(a)(v)).

ILLUSTRATIVE CASH-OUT

$22.00 ticket+$0.67 cents→$0.00 remaining
Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-103Exit rights ≠ legality
Safeguard 5

Software enforces non-bypassable rules.

Mandatory pre-reveal, accept/decline, no post-acceptance RNG, predetermined reels, and redemption rules are architecturally enforced—not merely published as disclaimers.

Why enforcement matters in Wyoming

Wyoming device cases and the 2018 opinion turn on actual mechanics—how the machine pays, what is predetermined, and whether the house keeps a share—not marketing labels. FOE Sheridan disregarded a “bingo” label. Wyoming Downs disregarded an Instant Racing / pari-mutuel characterization the commission had accepted. Software enforcement is how the timing distinction can be proved if charges are brought under § 6-7-102 or devices are seized under § 6-7-103.

Implementation risks

Alternate clients, debug modes, stale-offer acceptance, or server paths that charge on preview would collapse the distinction from Opinion 2018-001 and expose operators to misdemeanor gambling, felony professional gambling, device seizure, and the premise presumption. Casino-style presentation without the enforced accept/decline sequence is the fact pattern Wyoming’s Attorney General and Supreme Court have already condemned.

Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-102Engineering ≠ statutory permission
Required analysis

Has this exact model been tested in Wyoming?

We did not identify a reported appellate decision in Wyoming directly testing this complete transaction architecture—mandatory pre-reveal, exact monetary disclosure before financial commitment, genuine accept/decline with no charge on decline, no post-acceptance randomness, finite predetermined pool, predetermined reels, software-enforced safeguards, and cent-level redemption.

What Wyoming courts and agencies have addressed—and how those systems differ

  • Wyo. Att’y Gen. Formal Op. 2018-001 (Dec. 11, 2018) — Requested by Natrona County District Attorney Michael Blonigen. Attorney General Peter K. Michael examined Banilla Games “Nudge” and “Hot Swap” terminals (titles such as Bath-time Bucks, Fruity Sevens, Spooky’s Loot, Mega Money Reel). Players paid, then had about 15 seconds to nudge a reel or swap a symbol. The opinion found financial wagers and chance; machines were programmed to yield predetermined amounts on each spin; some spins were predetermined losers; operators kept a percentage. Conclusion: illegal gambling devices; players engaged in gambling; providers engaged in professional gambling. Historic horse racing and Wind River tribal gaming were expressly carved out of the opinion’s scope. Not a judicial holding and not binding precedent. Partially analogous on predetermined electronic payouts and retail cabinets. Materially distinguishable because consideration occurred before the result was known and there was no accept/decline with zero cost on rejection of a disclosed result. The Legislature later created a licensed skill-based amusement-game regime; that is legislation, not a judicial test of NCG architecture.
  • 37 Gambling Devices (Cheyenne Elks Club and Cheyenne Music & Vending, Inc.) v. State, 694 P.2d 711 (Wyo. 1985) — Published. Seizure of electronic games, blackjack and craps tables, and stamp machines selling pickle cards. Pickle cards had a set number of tickets, a predetermined number of winners, and a predetermined profit if the deal sold out; tabs revealed slot-like symbols compared to a chart. Held not “raffles” under the then-lottery exception (former § 6-9-111). The Court adopted the warning that the law is not required to be blind to “the ceaseless efforts and ingenuity” used to circumvent gambling-device laws. Partially analogous on predetermined finite prize pools. Materially distinguishable on payment-before-reveal and the absence of a no-charge decline after exact disclosure. Statutory numbering has since moved from Title 6, chapter 9 into chapter 7.
  • Fraternal Order of Eagles Sheridan Aerie No. 186, Inc. v. State ex rel. Forwood, 2006 WY 4, 126 P.3d 847 (Wyo. 2006) — Published. Fast Action Bingo electronic cabinets, supplied by a for-profit vendor, held not statutory bingo; equipment held to be gambling devices; vendor induced gambling for profit. Relied on 37 Gambling Devices. Vagueness challenge to the bingo exclusion failed. Not applicable as a test of NCG pre-reveal mechanics; relevant to labels, vendor profit, and device classification.
  • Wyoming Downs Rodeo Events, LLC v. State, 2006 WY 55, 134 P.3d 1223 (Wyo. 2006) — Published. Instant Racing terminals held unlawful gambling devices; the Pari-Mutuel Commission exceeded its statutory authority by authorizing them by rule. The Legislature later expressly authorized historic horse racing (2013) and gave the commission rulemaking power. Not applicable as a test of NCG pre-reveal mechanics; relevant to the rule that agencies cannot legalize a device the statute does not authorize, and that slot-like terminals are treated as gambling devices until the Legislature speaks.
  • Wyo. Stat. §§ 11-25-301 through 11-25-306 (skill-based amusement games) — After Opinion 2018-001, the Legislature grandfathered existing machines on a trial basis (2020), then removed the sunset and confined play to licensed establishments (2021), later limiting locations (2022). Current definition: consideration on a fixed commercial electrical device where bona fide player skill, rather than any inherent element of chance, is the primary factor. Caps: $3 per play, $3,000 per play payout, four machines, age 21, laboratory report, permits and decals. Regulatory path, not a judicial test of NCG architecture. NCG’s operator-assigned monetary result does not meet the primary-skill definition.
  • Wyoming Gaming Commission, illegal iGaming / sweepstakes warning (May 22, 2025) — Executive Director Nicholas Larramendy: no online casino, iGaming, or sweepstakes site is licensed, and all such platforms “are operating illegally in Wyoming.” Enforcement statement, not a judicial holding, and directed at remote sites—but it shows current regulator posture toward sweepstakes branding and real-money payouts outside a license.
  • Wyo. Stat. §§ 40-12-201 through 40-12-209 — Promotional advertising of prizes: written prize notice before requesting payment; required disclosures. Consumer-protection statute, not a gambling authorization and not a test of NCG architecture.

Enforcement and regulatory activity (not judicial approval)

Opinion 2018-001 told local law enforcement that gambling is a crime, not a civil violation, and that timing of next steps was for prosecutors. A 2019 Goshen County public notice stated that then-Attorney General Bridget Hill concurred with Opinion 2018-001. Vendors filed a Natrona County action seeking to enjoin reliance on the opinion; we did not identify a reported appellate decision resolving that challenge on the merits before the Legislature created the skill-game statutes. The Kahler memorandum (May 7, 2024) to the Joint Appropriations Committee recounts this history as legislative background; it is not a formal opinion. Absence of a decision testing this complete architecture is not a judicial determination of legality.

Critical distinction

“No reported Wyoming appellate decision directly testing this architecture” is materially different from “A Wyoming court has ruled this architecture legal.” Neither statement has been found true here. Formal Opinion 2018-001 is the closest official analysis of predetermined electronic payouts—and it is adverse on payment-before-result machines. It remains an Attorney General opinion, not a holding.

No direct Wyoming appellate precedent identified
Strongest contrary arguments

What Wyoming prosecutors and regulators could argue.

1. Any-chance is enough

§ 6-7-101(a)(iii) requires only that gain be contingent “in whole or in part” on lot or chance, or on an event the player does not control. Prosecutors need not win a predominance fight. Uncertainty about which offer appears next can be framed as that residual chance or as an uncontrolled event.

2. Predetermination already lost at the Attorney General’s office

Opinion 2018-001 used programmed, predetermined spin amounts—and predetermined losers—as reasons the Banilla machines were gambling devices. Counsel must explain, with facts and not labels, why disclosure before commitment and a free decline are legally different from that pay-then-reveal programming.

3. 37 Gambling Devices and the ingenuity canon

The Supreme Court treated a finite, predetermined pickle-card deal as chance and adopted language that courts need not be blind to ingenuity that recasts gambling devices. FOE Sheridan and Wyoming Downs applied that common-sense approach to electronic bingo and Instant Racing cabinets. A predetermined pool plus casino-style reels will be measured against that line.

4. The skill doors are closed

§ 6-7-101(a)(iii)(A) now excludes skill-based amusement games from the bona fide skill-contest exception. Title 11 requires skill as the primary factor, plus $3 / $3,000 / four-machine / age-21 / establishment limits and a laboratory report. NCG’s operator-assigned result fails the primary-skill definition. Marketing NCG as a “skill game” would invite 2018-001 and Title 11 enforcement, not shelter.

5. Professional gambling is a felony; devices and premises are presumed

Aiding or inducing gambling with intent to derive a profit is professional gambling—a felony under § 6-7-102(b). After 2026, “profit” means any financial gain. A device used in that activity is a gambling device; a place where it is found is presumed a professional-gambling premise; devices, records, and proceeds are seizable.

6. Session-wide staking and credit balances

Money inserted upfront creates a continuing credit balance. Each Accept may be characterized as risking that balance across a session—the structure Opinion 2018-001 and 37 Gambling Devices treated as paying for chances, not inspecting disclosed sales.

7. Current Gaming Commission posture

The Commission’s May 22, 2025 warning states that unlicensed sweepstakes and iGaming sites offering real-money payouts are operating illegally. Presentation that resembles slots or “sweepstakes” cabinets will invite the same investigative path even if backend logic differs. The lottery statute separately forbids VLTs and player-touch electronic lottery games.

NCG factual responses and residual risk

Responses: at acceptance the monetary result is fixed and known; declines cost nothing; no post-acceptance RNG; Opinion 2018-001 and 37 Gambling Devices involved payment-before-outcome mechanics; the Title 11 skill path is not the NCG theory—the timing of § 6-7-101(a)(iii) “contingent” gain, and possibly the bona fide business-transaction exclusion, is. Residual risk: the any-chance definition, Formal Opinion 2018-001, published Supreme Court device cases, felony professional gambling, seizure and premise presumption, and an active Gaming Commission remain material pending Wyoming counsel review. The timing distinction is supportable; it is not settled.

Formal Op. 2018-001Adverse authority must be addressed, not dismissed
Complete transaction analysis

Chronology: when is the player financially committed?

“The player accepts or declines a fully disclosed, predetermined transaction. No later random event alters the monetary result. The legal question is whether Wyoming treats that sequence as risking property for gain contingent in whole or in part on chance under § 6-7-101(a)(iii)—or as something materially different from the pay-then-reveal machines in Formal Opinion 2018-001 and 37 Gambling Devices.”

This is the position to test—not a Wyoming legal conclusion. Compare to Opinion 2018-001 (pay, then a programmed spin amount) and 37 Gambling Devices (pay, then pull a predetermined pickle-card tab).

  1. 1 / POOLFinite pool predetermined
  2. 2 / REQUESTPlayer requests next offer
  3. 3 / REVEALExact result disclosed
  4. 4 / TERMSCost and result both known
  5. 5 / CHOICEAccept or decline
  6. 6 / SETTLENo post-accept RNG
  7. 7 / EXITRedeem remaining cents
Authorities

Primary Wyoming sources.

Verified . Binding precedent and current statutes distinguished from Attorney General opinions, legislative memoranda, and agency warnings.

  1. [1]
    Wyoming statute · definitions

    Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-101 ↗

    Official Title 6 compilation as of July 1, 2026 (includes 2026 Budget Session amendments). Gambling as risking property for gain contingent in whole or in part upon lot or chance in a game on cards, dice, balls, or a gambling device, or upon an uncontrolled event; device, premise, professional-gambling, and profit definitions; skill-contest exclusion does not include skill-based amusement games. Older cases quote prior “lot, chance, the operation of a gambling device” wording.

  2. [2]
    Wyoming Attorney General · formal opinion / not precedent

    Formal Op. 2018-001 ↗

    Dec. 11, 2018 (Peter K. Michael, to Natrona County D.A. Blonigen). Banilla predetermined-payout “skill” terminals held illegal gambling devices; players gambling; providers professional gambling. Official index at the Attorney General’s Formal Opinions page (1 MB download). Advisory only; not a judicial holding.

  3. [3]
    Wyoming Supreme Court · binding

    37 Gambling Devices v. State, 694 P.2d 711 ↗

    (Wyo. 1985) (Cheyenne Elks). Predetermined pickle-card deals are not raffles; electronic and table devices forfeitable; ingenuity canon. Cited former Title 6, chapter 9 numbering.

  4. [4]
    Wyoming Supreme Court · binding

    FOE Sheridan, 2006 WY 4 ↗

    126 P.3d 847 (Wyo. 2006). Fast Action Bingo is not statutory bingo; machines are gambling devices; for-profit vendor induced gambling. Relies on 37 Gambling Devices.

  5. [5]
    Wyoming statute · offenses

    Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-102 ↗

    Gambling: misdemeanor, up to six months and $750. Professional gambling: felony, up to three years and $3,000. Same official Title 6 PDF.

  6. [6]
    Wyoming statute · seizure

    Wyo. Stat. § 6-7-103 ↗

    Gambling devices, records, and proceeds subject to seizure; antique devices protected unless used in violation of the article.

  7. [7]
    Wyoming statute · skill-game definition

    Wyo. Stat. § 11-25-102(a)(xix) ↗

    Official Title 11 compilation. Skill-based amusement game: consideration on a fixed commercial electrical device where bona fide player skill, rather than any inherent element of chance, is the primary factor. Cross-referenced from § 6-7-101(a)(xiii).

  8. [8]
    Wyoming statute · skill-game limits

    Wyo. Stat. § 11-25-303 ↗

    $3 maximum play; $3,000 maximum payout; four machines; age 21; establishment location rules (with a limited grandfather). See also Commission Chapter 5 game-limitation rules.

  9. [9]
    Wyoming Gaming Commission · enforcement statement

    WGC iGaming / sweepstakes warning ↗

    May 22, 2025. Unlicensed online casino, iGaming, and sweepstakes sites offering real-money payouts “are operating illegally in Wyoming.” Not a judicial holding and not an approval of brick-and-mortar cash cabinets.

  10. [10]
    Wyoming statute · lottery

    Wyo. Stat. § 9-17-103(a)(vi) ↗

    Authorized lottery games limited to a state or multi-state lottery; shall not include instant tickets, scratch-offs, video lottery terminals, or any other electronic game involving direct physical contact between the player and a machine. Lottery play is excluded from “gambling” only when run by the Wyoming Lottery Corporation (§ 6-7-101(a)(iii)(J)).

  11. [11]
    Wyoming Supreme Court · binding

    Wyoming Downs, 2006 WY 55 ↗

    134 P.3d 1223 (Wyo. 2006). Instant Racing terminals are gambling devices; commission could not authorize them by rule. Historic horse racing was later authorized by statute—an example of legislative, not judicial, legalization.

  12. [12]
    Wyoming statute · skill-game authorization / penalties

    Wyo. Stat. §§ 11-25-301, 11-25-306 ↗

    Commission approval required; noncompliant games must be removed. Separate penalties for skill-game violations. See also Commission skill-based amusement game page.

  13. [13]
    Wyoming Attorney General · legislative memorandum / not a formal opinion

    Kahler memo, May 7, 2024 ↗

    Senior Assistant Attorney General Michael T. Kahler to the Joint Appropriations Committee. Recounts the 2018 opinion, 2020–2022 skill-game legislation, historic horse racing after Wyoming Downs, and the list of § 6-7-101(a)(iii) exclusions. Background only.

  14. [14]
    Wyoming statute · prize promotions

    Wyo. Stat. §§ 40-12-201 to 40-12-209 ↗

    Promotional advertising of prizes: written prize notice before requesting payment; required disclosures. Consumer-protection rules, not a license to operate cash-prize gambling devices. Official text also in the Title 40 compilation at wyoleg.gov.

Disclaimer: This brief is research and issue-spotting for professional discussion—not legal advice, Gaming Commission approval, lottery authorization, tribal-compact authorization, or permission to operate. Formal Opinion 2018-001 is not binding precedent. The Wyoming Constitution does not contain a lottery prohibition; the governing limits are statutory. Wyoming counsel should verify all citations, the July 1, 2026 statutory text, local enforcement practices, compact and lottery exclusivity questions, and the actual deployed software before any compliance representation.