Canadian rapper and R&B performer Drake is named in a civil class-action lawsuit filed under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) in Virginia, accusing the superstar and others of promoting unlawful real-money gambling through the social casino platform Stake.us. The lawsuit, brought by two Virginia residents, does not involve criminal charges, but alleges the platform uses a sweepstakes-style currency system to disguise what plaintiffs claim is illegal gambling activity.
The case has been filed in Virginia state court, and no hearing date has been scheduled, according to the court docket. Plaintiffs LaShawnna Ridley and Tiffany Hines say they were encouraged to try their luck on Stake.us after viewing Drake streaming content in which he urged viewers to participate in giveaways. There were also issues regarding the legality of Stake’s user-to-user tipping feature, which the lawsuit argued functioned as an unregulated money-transfer system, with no financial oversight.
If the plaintiffs prevail, those named in the legal filing could face significant civil penalties under RICO, including treble damages and statutory fines. While the lawsuit is still in its early stages, legal experts say the case could test how far civil RICO statutes can be used to pursue influencers and promoters tied to sweepstakes-style gambling platforms.
The size of those audiences has become central to the plaintiffs’ claims, who argue that the scale of the streams amplified the alleged promotional impact of the gambling content. According to analytics from StreamsCharts, Drake’s Kick livestreams have averaged about 29,000 concurrent viewers over the past 30 days, with a peak of roughly 202,000 viewers on individual streams. Meanwhile, Ross consistently attracts larger audiences. In the past month, his streams averaged roughly 46,000 viewers, with a peak concurrent viewership of about 142,000.
Social casinos and how they work
The advent of social casinos has snuck onto the radar in the USA. They first came to prominence in the mid-2010s, but had been established even earlier through sites like Zynga Poker on social media platforms like Facebook and VK.
They became a fast-growing corner of online gaming by offering casino-style slots and table games without calling them gambling. In many cases, without using real-money wagers in the traditional sense.
The key is a structure borrowed from how a sweepstakes is defined. Many of these sites run a two-currency system. One currency (often Gold Coins or GC) is used for standard play and is not redeemable. The second (often Sweeps Coins or SC) is promoted as a free sweepstakes entry currency that can be used in “promotional play” and, if won, may be redeemed for real prizes such as cash or gift cards, which is subject to eligibility rules and verification.
All customers must pass Know Your Customer (KYC) verification processes before they can redeem any prize, a standard practice employed in more mature casino markets around Europe. This includes verifying identification by passing a liveness check and by submitting documentation with an address that matches the one given to the platform by the customer upon sign up. These measures are in place, companies say, to guard against money laundering and to protect identity.
However, while there are some safety tools in place, critics argue social casinos are exploitative and do not safeguard the customer’s well-being by employing proper welfare checks.
Scrutiny on social casinos begins to deepen
New York Attorney General, Letitia James, recently signed a law banning social casinos in the state of New York in the summer of 2025. She said at the time: “Online sweepstakes casinos are illegal, dangerous, and can seriously ruin people’s finances.”
New York State Gaming Commission Chairman Brian O’Dwyer was similarly damning in his criticism, saying: “These so-called ‘sweepstakes’ games are unscrupulous, unsecure, and unlawful. I have been very vocal about the need to crack down on these operations, and I am thrilled that Attorney General James has taken this significant step to eradicate the illegal gambling market.”
As of early 2026, at least nine U.S. states (Washington, Idaho, Montana, Connecticut, California, New Jersey, Nevada, Michigan, and New York) have either explicitly banned or effectively blocked sweepstakes-style social casinos.
Advocates of the industry believe it provides a friendly, fun and safe service to millions of Americans. Responding to criticism from the American Gaming Association (AGA) last year, the Social and Promotional Games Association (SPGA) argued: “The AGA knows its claims of irresponsible operation by social sweepstakes sites are misleading. SPGA members operate under a published Code of Conduct requiring age verification, location verification, KYC systems and processes, and Anti Money Laundering (AML) policies and processes, often employing the exact same technology as AGA members. And most social sweeps sites have tools in place to allow consumers to control their play and pay some form of state tax, such as sales or corporate tax.
Whether public opinion begins to turn on social casino sites remains to be seen. Industry insiders will be keeping a close eye on mega star Drake and the results of his upcoming legal battle. The case adds to growing pressure on regulators to clarify where influencer promotion ends and unlawful gambling activity begins.
